Make Guardian Moderate ability multitarget using concentration.. [Archive]

EverRude

11-18-2009, 12:01 PM

I don't want to get into a big debate about the state of tank balance right now. Though I doubt it can be avoided because some will come here and still proclaim I'm just trying to make my class the best tank in game. Ofcoure that would be silly since I have a SK as well and love that class just as much for his versatility and power in heavy AE content. But I still want to make this request. Aside from some very skilled and well equipped players, Guardians as a whole struggle with TSO content and high dps group members. It has gotten to the point even I have switched to my SK as MT. Unless I know the group has weak DPS I will avoid bringing my guard out to tank for any group in TSO. Ofcourse a weak dps group benefits even more from the dps my SK brings. Thus my guard never gets played. It's not that guards are broken as some would suggest. We have a very good balance of skills, great defences, and in general a very fun class to play. But DPS IS Aggro in today's game and even the best guards have to sacrifise their greater surviabilty to maximize dps and try to hold aggro as tank. It doesn't work however for a lot of us in heroic content. DPS classes can still rip aggro unless the guard deliberately slows down group progress so that he has best skills up for every pull. Something most groups do not like. Guards possess a very good skill to Moderate the hate gain of one member of his group. It does not increase the guard's aggro it only reduces the target's aggro. Even with this skill that DPS can still rip aggro if there is a large desparity between the guards dps and the targets. A 10k wizard can still rip from a 5k guard. So this is not a OP skill that allows a guard to cruise through content and not play well. My proposal is to make the Moderate skill apply to the whole group or to atleast allow it to be applied to multiple targets using concentration slots. This will not allow a guard be sloppy or afk tank. It will not really even allow him to fight through heavy AE zones. But it will allow him a chance to compete for groups in zones he's built for. This change would have no impact on raids. The skill only applies to members of the guard's own group and therefore raidwide dps could still rip. Also any raid MT guard is already in a group specifically desinged to maximize the tank's dps and aggro. Please consider this change.

Bruener

11-18-2009, 01:44 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't want to get into a big debate about the state of tank balance right now. Though I doubt it can be avoided because some will come here and still proclaim I'm just trying to make my class the best tank in game. Ofcoure that would be silly since I have a SK as well and love that class just as much for his versatility and power in heavy AE content. But I still want to make this request. Aside from some very skilled and well equipped players, Guardians as a whole struggle with TSO content and high dps group members. It has gotten to the point even I have switched to my SK as MT. Unless I know the group has weak DPS I will avoid bringing my guard out to tank for any group in TSO. Ofcourse a weak dps group benefits even more from the dps my SK brings. Thus my guard never gets played. It's not that guards are broken as some would suggest. We have a very good balance of skills, great defences, and in general a very fun class to play. But DPS IS Aggro in today's game and even the best guards have to sacrifise their greater surviabilty to maximize dps and try to hold aggro as tank. It doesn't work however for a lot of us in heroic content. DPS classes can still rip aggro unless the guard deliberately slows down group progress so that he has best skills up for every pull. Something most groups do not like. Guards possess a very good skill to Moderate the hate gain of one member of his group. It does not increase the guard's aggro it only reduces the target's aggro. Even with this skill that DPS can still rip aggro if there is a large desparity between the guards dps and the targets. A 10k wizard can still rip from a 5k guard. So this is not a OP skill that allows a guard to cruise through content and not play well. My proposal is to make the Moderate skill apply to the whole group or to atleast allow it to be applied to multiple targets using concentration slots. This will not allow a guard be sloppy or afk tank. It will not really even allow him to fight through heavy AE zones. But it will allow him a chance to compete for groups in zones he's built for. This change would have no impact on raids. The skill only applies to members of the guard's own group and therefore raidwide dps could still rip. Also any raid MT guard is already in a group specifically desinged to maximize the tank's dps and aggro. Please consider this change.</blockquote>I think Moderate being made into a group buff (possibly some type of end-line AA ability) would basically solve the problem some Guards are seeing at the heroic level. The great thing about having an ability like this is that it does solve a lot of the "issue" that heroic Guards say are the problem without having to OP them at the raid level.

Banditman

11-18-2009, 02:26 PM

I can't see a whole lot of downside to making Moderate groupwide. In fact, I'd actually make it some sort of Alternate similar to the way a Shadowknight gets an Alternate to Pledge of Armament.In a raid situation, a Guardian might not want to Moderate his entire group, for instance, he probably wouldn't want to Moderate someone feeding him Hate. However, he might still want to Moderate someone else.

RafaelSmith

11-18-2009, 02:29 PM

Group Moderate would help....aggro would still be work but thats how it should be.I still think a few other small tweaks would be required. Perhaps another blue AE. I also think Hold the Line buff is something that needs to be "updated" to match the current game. It just doesnt serve its intended purpose anymore.

Tehom

11-18-2009, 02:36 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>I think Moderate being made into a group buff (possibly some type of end-line AA ability) would basically solve the problem some Guards are seeing at the heroic level. The great thing about having an ability like this is that it does solve a lot of the "issue" that heroic Guards say are the problem without having to OP them at the raid level.</blockquote>Agreed, I think it'd do nicely to specifically target issues they might have at the heroic level while leaving them unchanged in raids.

Wasuna

11-18-2009, 03:10 PM

multi target moderate with concentration would be nice. The group moderate won't happen since Troubadors already have a group agro reduction song.

thial

11-18-2009, 03:28 PM

group moderate would be a good step, it goes with the the guards role of "providing leadership and protection for their allies." But thats just the start, as rafael said hold the line is another buff that needs to be looked at.. Plant is another thing to look at, adding some sort of hate componet would be nice..

Bruener

11-18-2009, 03:38 PM

<cite>Wasuna wrote:</cite><blockquote>multi target moderate with concentration would be nice. The group moderate won't happen since Troubadors already have a group agro reduction song.</blockquote>Just because Troubs have it doesn't mean that Guards can't have it. There are many abilities that are shared by many classes. Furthermore, Troubs are designed for more caster oriented while Guards are more melee oriented.

EverRude

11-18-2009, 04:02 PM

Glad to see some positive responses thus far. I am specifically trying to avoid asking for too many tweaks for two reasons. First I honestly want to avoid guards becoming "ezmode" tanks. I enjoy the work I put into holding aggro as a guard especially in some ae heavy scenarios. I agree it would be nice to cruise through Caverns of the Afficted with my guard like I can my SK but for now I'd be more than happy to tank HoF or NA without some myth dps classes from making my job impossible. Second I would rather not request changes (like blue CAs) that would step on too many toes. That causes these threads to deginerate into flamefests that get all offtopic. I have np with some zones being more fun to play with as a zerker or SK. One of the reasons RoK sucked for them was a lack of content that allowed them to shine. Let'em be the best for some zones and some types of combat. It adds to the flavor and depth of the game. I just want my guard to have an equal chance to hold aggro in the same groups as my equally equipped SK in some zones. I believe that this tweak to moderate would provide guards a good chance to group in zones they currently have the skills for. Besides most of the AE problems guards have could be solved by groups learning how guards tank and adjusting their play style rather than trying to adjust the guard set.

EverRude

11-18-2009, 04:45 PM

Great. Moderator moved this to the guardian only forum. Atleast could have chosen the fighter general forum. The idea is to get attention and discussion on the topic. While I am sure most of you guys will agree with this idea I doubt it'll get much discussion. Oh I know some of y'all think we're just fine so we might discuss that but nothing like having other classes comment. Oh well. I tried.

RafaelSmith

11-18-2009, 05:11 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Besides most of the AE problems guards have could be solved by groups learning how guards tank and adjusting their play style rather than trying to adjust the guard set.</blockquote>Agreed.I firmly believe that while Guards do have some minor game mechanic issues the biggest contributer to the problems and frustrations we see in groups is due to players either not understanding or simply forgetting that grouping with a Guard is not the same as Grouping with a SK or any of the other fighters for that matter. Its just that when it comes to groups Guard and SK are the two extremes with regards to how players have to adjust. Guard being the most dependent...SK being the least.But that is a player problem and not something SOE can do anything about. Ive come across many DPS classes that have only ever run TSO instances with SKs. The only time they ever run with Guards are in raids where most of these aggro issues don't exist. Its hard to blame them for not understanding that they actually have to take part in helping the tank. All they are used to is burn burn burn never having to worry about their part in aggro. I sorta relate to those classes because I know when I play my Assassin....its just so much easier and less stressfull grouping with an SK......its easy to forget I am suppose to watch what I do.When I am in a group of players I know or at least know are smart ...I try to teach them how to group with a Guard.....at least that way I know ive done everything to make sure that any problems the group faces are either my fault or that of the game mechanics. If its a Warlock or Wizard I know well I try to work out syncing my reinforcements with their nastiest nukes, etc....instead of just lettting them spam at will like they could with a SK. Back on topic.........Group Moderate or multi-target Moderate would be a very welcomed buff. Buff HTL. A extra blue would be nice but too many would probably QQ about it. Thats the last thing we need now. I dont see anyone having issue with group moderate or HTL buffs.

therodge

11-18-2009, 05:34 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't want to get into a big debate about the state of tank balance right now. Though I doubt it can be avoided because some will come here and still proclaim I'm just trying to make my class the best tank in game. Ofcoure that would be silly since I have a SK as well and love that class just as much for his versatility and power in heavy AE content. But I still want to make this request. Aside from some very skilled and well equipped players, Guardians as a whole struggle with TSO content and high dps group members. It has gotten to the point even I have switched to my SK as MT. Unless I know the group has weak DPS I will avoid bringing my guard out to tank for any group in TSO. Ofcourse a weak dps group benefits even more from the dps my SK brings. Thus my guard never gets played. It's not that guards are broken as some would suggest. We have a very good balance of skills, great defences, and in general a very fun class to play. But DPS IS Aggro in today's game and even the best guards have to sacrifise their greater surviabilty to maximize dps and try to hold aggro as tank. It doesn't work however for a lot of us in heroic content. DPS classes can still rip aggro unless the guard deliberately slows down group progress so that he has best skills up for every pull. Something most groups do not like. Guards possess a very good skill to Moderate the hate gain of one member of his group. It does not increase the guard's aggro it only reduces the target's aggro. Even with this skill that DPS can still rip aggro if there is a large desparity between the guards dps and the targets. A 10k wizard can still rip from a 5k guard. So this is not a OP skill that allows a guard to cruise through content and not play well. My proposal is to make the Moderate skill apply to the whole group or to atleast allow it to be applied to multiple targets using concentration slots. This will not allow a guard be sloppy or afk tank. It will not really even allow him to fight through heavy AE zones. But it will allow him a chance to compete for groups in zones he's built for. This change would have no impact on raids. The skill only applies to members of the guard's own group and therefore raidwide dps could still rip. Also any raid MT guard is already in a group specifically desinged to maximize the tank's dps and aggro. Please consider this change.</blockquote>As a Paladin for balance i suggest two changes to this, 1. make it an option (like the paladin grant of armement alternate you can cast either or) second remove concentraion and make the hate reduction larger, not sure what its at now but id say the amount of a paladins amends is good 40%

EverRude

11-18-2009, 06:26 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't want to get into a big debate about the state of tank balance right now. Though I doubt it can be avoided because some will come here and still proclaim I'm just trying to make my class the best tank in game. Ofcoure that would be silly since I have a SK as well and love that class just as much for his versatility and power in heavy AE content. But I still want to make this request. Aside from some very skilled and well equipped players, Guardians as a whole struggle with TSO content and high dps group members. It has gotten to the point even I have switched to my SK as MT. Unless I know the group has weak DPS I will avoid bringing my guard out to tank for any group in TSO. Ofcourse a weak dps group benefits even more from the dps my SK brings. Thus my guard never gets played. It's not that guards are broken as some would suggest. We have a very good balance of skills, great defences, and in general a very fun class to play. But DPS IS Aggro in today's game and even the best guards have to sacrifise their greater surviabilty to maximize dps and try to hold aggro as tank. It doesn't work however for a lot of us in heroic content. DPS classes can still rip aggro unless the guard deliberately slows down group progress so that he has best skills up for every pull. Something most groups do not like. Guards possess a very good skill to Moderate the hate gain of one member of his group. It does not increase the guard's aggro it only reduces the target's aggro. Even with this skill that DPS can still rip aggro if there is a large desparity between the guards dps and the targets. A 10k wizard can still rip from a 5k guard. So this is not a OP skill that allows a guard to cruise through content and not play well. My proposal is to make the Moderate skill apply to the whole group or to atleast allow it to be applied to multiple targets using concentration slots. This will not allow a guard be sloppy or afk tank. It will not really even allow him to fight through heavy AE zones. But it will allow him a chance to compete for groups in zones he's built for. This change would have no impact on raids. The skill only applies to members of the guard's own group and therefore raidwide dps could still rip. Also any raid MT guard is already in a group specifically desinged to maximize the tank's dps and aggro. Please consider this change.</blockquote>As a Paladin for balance i suggest two changes to this, 1. make it an option (like the paladin grant of armement alternate you can cast either or) second remove concentraion and make the hate reduction larger, not sure what its at now but id say the amount of a paladins amends is good 40%</blockquote>Not entirely sure what you mean. Do you disagree with making it group wide or atleast multitarget? And I'm really not sure how what I suggest affecst our balance with Paladins. Your Amends reduces the hate of your target AND gives it to you. Our moderate just reduces the target's hate but affects us in no other way. Which still lives us vulnerable to loosing aggro to any other dps in the group. These days it a rare dps that can't out damage a heroic equipped guard.

therodge

11-18-2009, 08:16 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't want to get into a big debate about the state of tank balance right now. Though I doubt it can be avoided because some will come here and still proclaim I'm just trying to make my class the best tank in game. Ofcoure that would be silly since I have a SK as well and love that class just as much for his versatility and power in heavy AE content. But I still want to make this request. Aside from some very skilled and well equipped players, Guardians as a whole struggle with TSO content and high dps group members. It has gotten to the point even I have switched to my SK as MT. Unless I know the group has weak DPS I will avoid bringing my guard out to tank for any group in TSO. Ofcourse a weak dps group benefits even more from the dps my SK brings. Thus my guard never gets played. It's not that guards are broken as some would suggest. We have a very good balance of skills, great defences, and in general a very fun class to play. But DPS IS Aggro in today's game and even the best guards have to sacrifise their greater surviabilty to maximize dps and try to hold aggro as tank. It doesn't work however for a lot of us in heroic content. DPS classes can still rip aggro unless the guard deliberately slows down group progress so that he has best skills up for every pull. Something most groups do not like. Guards possess a very good skill to Moderate the hate gain of one member of his group. It does not increase the guard's aggro it only reduces the target's aggro. Even with this skill that DPS can still rip aggro if there is a large desparity between the guards dps and the targets. A 10k wizard can still rip from a 5k guard. So this is not a OP skill that allows a guard to cruise through content and not play well. My proposal is to make the Moderate skill apply to the whole group or to atleast allow it to be applied to multiple targets using concentration slots. This will not allow a guard be sloppy or afk tank. It will not really even allow him to fight through heavy AE zones. But it will allow him a chance to compete for groups in zones he's built for. This change would have no impact on raids. The skill only applies to members of the guard's own group and therefore raidwide dps could still rip. Also any raid MT guard is already in a group specifically desinged to maximize the tank's dps and aggro. Please consider this change.</blockquote>As a Paladin for balance i suggest two changes to this, 1. make it an option (like the paladin grant of armement alternate you can cast either or) second remove concentraion and make the hate reduction larger, not sure what its at now but id say the amount of a paladins amends is good 40%</blockquote>Not entirely sure what you mean. Do you disagree with making it group wide or atleast multitarget? And I'm really not sure how what I suggest affecst our balance with Paladins. Your Amends reduces the hate of your target AND gives it to you. Our moderate just reduces the target's hate but affects us in no other way. Which still lives us vulnerable to loosing aggro to any other dps in the group. These days it a rare dps that can't out damage a heroic equipped guard.</blockquote>im not arguing with you im saying its not enough theirs no reason to but a conc slot on it, and currently moderate is a tad to weak and should reduce hate of the group by atleast 40%, also that it should be an option for it to either be cast single or on the group similier to pledge of armament on paladins.and i say paladin for balance simply becuase most people on the boards are clearly worried more about weather they stay on top, i am not i beileve in balance which means equality in the main job of an archetype in ALL areas, for fighters this is tanking

Rahatmattata

11-18-2009, 08:19 PM

Moderate also gives a 55% chance to use the guard's avoid on a failed avoidance check. Having this on every member of the group, plus sustain and never surrender, might be a little OP.Regardless, I'd still prefer something else other than a generic "make moderate group-wide" tweak, as I don't really think it would help that much. Usually you have 1 high dps with moderate, and another feeding you hate anyway. I guess if you had no utility or transfers and 4 rogues/predators/sorcerers it might help.Also, this doesn't not make guards more viable as off-tanks, when any other plate fighter can MT or OT any content in the game, as well as burn down heroic zones (and raid trash) in mass pulls.

Rahatmattata

11-18-2009, 08:21 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>not sure what its at now but id say the amount of a paladins amends is good 40%</blockquote>Moderate is 38% threat reduction.

therodge

11-18-2009, 08:34 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Moderate also gives a 55% chance to use the guard's avoid on a failed avoidance check. Having this on every member of the group, plus sustain and never surrender, might be a little OP.Regardless, I'd still prefer something else other than a generic "make moderate group-wide" tweak, as I don't really think it would help that much. Usually you have 1 high dps with moderate, and another feeding you hate anyway. I guess if you had no utility or transfers and 4 rogues/predators/sorcerers it might help.Also, this doesn't not make guards more viable as off-tanks, when any other plate fighter can MT or OT any content in the game, as well as burn down heroic zones (and raid trash) in mass pulls.</blockquote>As said for balance i rather lock in the guard as best mt (which they currently are) and give them the ability to viably tank all content (as said balance) but as idiotic as most of his posts are bruener is correct, Guards should not be the best MT and OT leave the OT spot to sks/pals/and zerks while locking in the MT position for the guard. also even with the moderate chance of avoiding for group members, i still dont think thats OPed, more surivaility for the group is a tradeoff for the guard vs everyone else, less group dps, but more survivability or vice versa. depending on the tank.Edit: then i recall my previous stament from the poster above me, make it 50%

Rahatmattata

11-18-2009, 11:09 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>As said for balance i rather lock in the guard as best mt (which they currently are) and give them the ability to viably tank all content (as said balance) but as idiotic as most of his posts are bruener is correct, Guards should not be the best MT and OT leave the OT spot to sks/pals/and zerks while locking in the MT position for the guard.</blockquote>Guardians are not locked in as the best MT atm. Many guilds use other fighters to MT. Guards are only the best MT on mobs the raid is progressing on, and even then another plate fighter can get the job done... you might just have to spend an additional week worse case. For everything else, guardian is not at all the best MT.I think guardians should be able to OT as well as zerker/pally/sk can MT. And remembering the many posts before TSO, it would seem a lot of players disagree that guardians should have the MT position locked down. Although, it would make sense to have the most defensive fighter main tanking the hardest hitting mobs, many players QQ if they can't tank those mobs too because everyone is using guards to tank them.I'm starting to de-rail into a fighter balance thread though, so my bad. Seems impossible to not argue about fighter balance in any thread a shadowknight, guardian, or brawler is mentioned. That should be a sign that all is not well though.

therodge

11-19-2009, 03:56 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>As said for balance i rather lock in the guard as best mt (which they currently are) and give them the ability to viably tank all content (as said balance) but as idiotic as most of his posts are bruener is correct, Guards should not be the best MT and OT leave the OT spot to sks/pals/and zerks while locking in the MT position for the guard.</blockquote>Guardians are not locked in as the best MT atm. Many guilds use other fighters to MT. Guards are only the best MT on mobs the raid is progressing on, and even then another plate fighter can get the job done... you might just have to spend an additional week worse case. For everything else, guardian is not at all the best MT.I think guardians should be able to OT as well as zerker/pally/sk can MT. And remembering the many posts before TSO, it would seem a lot of players disagree that guardians should have the MT position locked down. Although, it would make sense to have the most defensive fighter main tanking the hardest hitting mobs, many players QQ if they can't tank those mobs too because everyone is using guards to tank them.I'm starting to de-rail into a fighter balance thread though, so my bad. Seems impossible to not argue about fighter balance in any thread a shadowknight, guardian, or brawler is mentioned. That should be a sign that all is not well though.</blockquote>im sorry my post was badly worded, i wasent saying that guards are locked in as mt, just that they are, they should be locked in that position in my opionion

Lethe5683

11-19-2009, 10:44 AM

Guardians are fine, SKs are just overpowered. Guardians should never be the de facto main tank as they were before.

MoeSizlak

11-19-2009, 04:23 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Moderate also gives a 55% chance to use the guard's avoid on a failed avoidance check. Having this on every member of the group, plus sustain and never surrender, might be a little OP.Regardless, I'd still prefer something else other than a generic "make moderate group-wide" tweak, as I don't really think it would help that much. Usually you have 1 high dps with moderate, and another feeding you hate anyway. I guess if you had no utility or transfers and 4 rogues/predators/sorcerers it might help.Also, this doesn't not make guards more viable as off-tanks, when any other plate fighter can MT or OT any content in the game, as well as burn down heroic zones (and raid trash) in mass pulls.</blockquote>Personally I'd rather have Moderate able to be cast on more than 1 personw ith concentration, not just a group buff. Like last night I had to turn down tanking for a guild group for Crucible because I knew I wasn't going to be able to hold aggro since it was Necro, Brig, Lock, Warden and Ranger. No way was I going to be able hold aggro on that group with no hate feed or gain buffs, and way too much good DPS for moderate to be useful. All that would do would make whoever I moderate die 4th or 5th. Give me the control, but also the penalty of having to figure out who I need and who I don't need to put that on to be successful.

MoeSizlak

11-19-2009, 04:28 PM

The only thing guardians have that make them good OTs is Recapture...which is situationally useful for helping the MT reestablish aggro. Although as MT it is also great for sticking adds to your OTs.Still don't understand the point of that being a class defining skill though since it's only useful in raid situations though. That's always kinda bothered me.

Bruener

11-19-2009, 04:39 PM

<cite>Tesar@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only thing guardians have that make them good OTs is Recapture...which is situationally useful for helping the MT reestablish aggro. Although as MT it is also great for sticking adds to your OTs.Still don't understand the point of that being a class defining skill though since it's only useful in raid situations though. That's always kinda bothered me.</blockquote>Well the answer is simple, something I have been saying, although some of you don't like it. Guards are rolled to be MTs...they are designed with raiding in mind first. Hence they seem lacking at the Heroic level but balanced at the raid level. Give them more and they become OP'd at the raid level.Recapture is an awesome ability at the raid level. There are so many target-wiping mobs in TSO, specifically wiping to a non-fighter type of wipe. Recapture is an awesome ability that saves a lot of people from dying over and over again.Oh and ratatouli you are completely wrong about Guards at the raid level. Guards are still the best MT, especially through progression. They should not be top contenders for the OT spot because they basically secure the niche of MT spot. That leaves 1 class for MT spot and 3 competing for the OT slots. The only area where Guards seem to be lacking is at the heroic level and a group moderate would solve most of those issues without OP'ing them at the raid level.

RafaelSmith

11-19-2009, 05:00 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Tesar@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only thing guardians have that make them good OTs is Recapture...which is situationally useful for helping the MT reestablish aggro. Although as MT it is also great for sticking adds to your OTs.Still don't understand the point of that being a class defining skill though since it's only useful in raid situations though. That's always kinda bothered me.</blockquote>Well the answer is simple, something I have been saying, although some of you don't like it. Guards are rolled to be MTs...they are designed with raiding in mind first. Hence they seem lacking at the Heroic level but balanced at the raid level. Give them more and they become OP'd at the raid level.Recapture is an awesome ability at the raid level. There are so many target-wiping mobs in TSO, specifically wiping to a non-fighter type of wipe. Recapture is an awesome ability that saves a lot of people from dying over and over again.Oh and ratatouli you are completely wrong about Guards at the raid level. Guards are still the best MT, especially through progression. They should not be top contenders for the OT spot because they basically secure the niche of MT spot. That leaves 1 class for MT spot and 3 competing for the OT slots. The only area where Guards seem to be lacking is at the heroic level and a group moderate would solve most of those issues without OP'ing them at the raid level.</blockquote>Heroic content......especially the harder TSO stuff is without a doubt where Guards are lacking but we are also lacking in what I call the lower spectrum of raid progression. It is here that the bulk of my play takes place. Personally I view WoE and things like the first 2-3 named in TMC, YiS etc as the lower end of the spectrum. WoE is clearly intended to be MT'd by SK. Any raid that is currently only able to takle that level of raid content would be foolish to not use an SK over any of the others. That level of raiding is closer to heroic content IMO so the weaknesses that Guard face apply.......as does the strengths of SKs.I still think that claming that a class is fine because in an ideal setup its the preferred one for a limited segment of the game content is wrong. As is trying to balance around MT -vs- OT slots.Besides, by comparison......SK is nowhere near as crappy a raid MT as Guard is a group MT. I believe all fighter types should be able to compete for any tank spots that might be required for any given raid. Who is picked should be based on who is better player. Not pigeonhole certain ones to certain specfic content while alllowing others to be perfectly viable for all.

Netty

11-19-2009, 05:08 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Guardians are fine, SKs are just overpowered. Guardians should never be the de facto main tank as they were before.</blockquote>You dont play a guard.. you know nothing on how a guard work. If guards can be the best MT we need the nerf all the other tanks both in grouping aoe solo and dps. Is that what you want?Im sick of ppl coming and saying guards are fine... Can you MT with a guard? yes. Can you MT with any of the other tank classes? Yes. the gap is to close tho. all tanks should be able to MT aye i agree. And they always could. and i did agree they needed to closen the gap back in the days. But it was over done as most other things. . .If guards are fine why are they so demanding on DWing to keep aggro? Does that make them more defensiv?If guards are fine why is it that any other tank can fill the MT spot but guards cant OT fine on adds and stuff?If guards are fine why are they the worste tank class hands down in the solo cont?Since you talk like you do i guess you play a pally. A hint for you they are as OP as SK:s atm.Back to the topic Moderate group wide wont do much to help the guard class. Leave it as it is imo.

RafaelSmith

11-19-2009, 05:32 PM

<cite>Netty wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Guardians are fine, SKs are just overpowered. Guardians should never be the de facto main tank as they were before.</blockquote>You dont play a guard.. you know nothing on how a guard work. If guards can be the best MT we need the nerf all the other tanks both in grouping aoe solo and dps. Is that what you want?Im sick of ppl coming and saying guards are fine... Can you MT with a guard? yes. Can you MT with any of the other tank classes? Yes. the gap is to close tho. all tanks should be able to MT aye i agree. And they always could. and i did agree they needed to closen the gap back in the days. But it was over done as most other things. . .If guards are fine why are they so demanding on DWing to keep aggro? Does that make them more defensiv?If guards are fine why is it that any other tank can fill the MT spot but guards cant OT fine on adds and stuff?If guards are fine why are they the worste tank class hands down in the solo cont?Since you talk like you do i guess you play a pally. A hint for you they are as OP as SK:s atm.Back to the topic Moderate group wide wont do much to help the guard class. Leave it as it is imo.</blockquote>Of course it would help.......especially at the segment of content where Guards really struggle. Its not gonna all the sudden make things easy-mode but it would help tone down some of the frustration we currently face.Curious what you think it is Guards need?At this point the best we can hope for is table scraps....asking for the 7 course meal like SKs got is not gonna be very fruitful.

Bruener

11-19-2009, 06:16 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Tesar@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only thing guardians have that make them good OTs is Recapture...which is situationally useful for helping the MT reestablish aggro. Although as MT it is also great for sticking adds to your OTs.Still don't understand the point of that being a class defining skill though since it's only useful in raid situations though. That's always kinda bothered me.</blockquote>Well the answer is simple, something I have been saying, although some of you don't like it. Guards are rolled to be MTs...they are designed with raiding in mind first. Hence they seem lacking at the Heroic level but balanced at the raid level. Give them more and they become OP'd at the raid level.Recapture is an awesome ability at the raid level. There are so many target-wiping mobs in TSO, specifically wiping to a non-fighter type of wipe. Recapture is an awesome ability that saves a lot of people from dying over and over again.Oh and ratatouli you are completely wrong about Guards at the raid level. Guards are still the best MT, especially through progression. They should not be top contenders for the OT spot because they basically secure the niche of MT spot. That leaves 1 class for MT spot and 3 competing for the OT slots. The only area where Guards seem to be lacking is at the heroic level and a group moderate would solve most of those issues without OP'ing them at the raid level.</blockquote>Heroic content......especially the harder TSO stuff is without a doubt where Guards are lacking but we are also lacking in what I call the lower spectrum of raid progression. It is here that the bulk of my play takes place. Personally I view WoE and things like the first 2-3 named in TMC, YiS etc as the lower end of the spectrum. WoE is clearly intended to be MT'd by SK. Any raid that is currently only able to takle that level of raid content would be foolish to not use an SK over any of the others. That level of raiding is closer to heroic content IMO so the weaknesses that Guard face apply.......as does the strengths of SKs.I still think that claming that a class is fine because in an ideal setup its the preferred one for a limited segment of the game content is wrong. As is trying to balance around MT -vs- OT slots.Besides, by comparison......SK is nowhere near as crappy a raid MT as Guard is a group MT. I believe all fighter types should be able to compete for any tank spots that might be required for any given raid. Who is picked should be based on who is better player. Not pigeonhole certain ones to certain specfic content while alllowing others to be perfectly viable for all.</blockquote>Ok, so what you consider raiding is basically mobs and zones that rogues can MT thru? The first couple named in YIS and ToMC are seriously a joke. These mobs required no crit mit and literally you could come from VP And go into those zones and kill those named the first night without spending any time in the xpac. WoE is a x2 zone and yes there are spots like the books where I can see why you would want one of the other tanks over a Guard tanking it. Wait, it is a x2, bring 2 tanks...let the OT handle the large AE trash....it is the same principle.Yes, we all know that tanks were brought much closer in survivability than they were in RoK. The reason for that is simply to ensure that the OT spot wasn't going to the Guard as well. Since Guards had far superior survivability and their agro was just as good it allowed them to be MT and OT tanks of choice. TSO they bump up the agro and survivability of the other tanks so that what do you know things aren't nearly out of whack. You get Guard still rollin MT and the other 3 competing for OT. Yeah, one of the other 3 can jump in and fill in when the Guard is gone...of course the vice versa is true even though people don't seem to acknowledge it. You can go one way or the other, but it is not the best set up. Guard - MT and Crusader/Zerk - OT is.Once again this thread is getting completely off on a tangent because some people are just way too greedy and really aren't understanding that Guards are far from broken.Group Moderate ftw. That way we can stop hearing people claim that Guards are "broken", although I am pretty sure that some people will never be happy.

RafaelSmith

11-19-2009, 06:58 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>WoE is a x2 zone and yes there are spots like the books where I can see why you would want one of the other tanks over a Guard tanking it. Wait, it is a x2, bring 2 tanks...let the OT handle the large AE trash....it is the same principle.</blockquote>Bring 2 tanks to WoE? Why [Removed for Content] your raid like that?.....just bring a single SK and fill that other slot with something actually needed instead of first wasting the MT slot on Guard and then filling the uneeded OT spot with a SK. Double waste.At no point in progression is Guard the best choice to MT WoE and the other so called easy raids. Unless there are no good SK/Pally/Zerker available.....bringing a Guard to WoE is charity.Actually while I haven't progressed as far as you have....I have yet to see any raid target where SK wasn't the clear best choice to MT. So now not only are you saying that Guards only purpose is to MT raids........its only upper tier raiding and we're suppose to be happy taking charity spots during the lower tiers of progression?Also in another thread you said that fighter balance is just about Aggro -vs- Surviveability. Here you say that the Survivability of the other fighters has to be buffed to be closer to that of Guard.......yet Guards should not get any boost to aggro and in fact Guard aggro was actually nerfed? So your only measure of balance uses variables that cannot be treated as equals? How is that even balance or fair?/derail off.Group Moderate would be very much welcomed to make grouping abit less frustrating. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />

Bruener

11-19-2009, 07:54 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>WoE is a x2 zone and yes there are spots like the books where I can see why you would want one of the other tanks over a Guard tanking it. Wait, it is a x2, bring 2 tanks...let the OT handle the large AE trash....it is the same principle.</blockquote>Bring 2 tanks to WoE? Why [Removed for Content] your raid like that?.....just bring a single SK and fill that other slot with something actually needed instead of first wasting the MT slot on Guard and then filling the uneeded OT spot with a SK. Double waste.At no point in progression is Guard the best choice to MT WoE and the other so called easy raids. Unless there are no good SK/Pally/Zerker available.....bringing a Guard to WoE is charity.Actually while I haven't progressed as far as you have....I have yet to see any raid target where SK wasn't the clear best choice to MT. So now not only are you saying that Guards only purpose is to MT raids........its only upper tier raiding and we're suppose to be happy taking charity spots during the lower tiers of progression?Also in another thread you said that fighter balance is just about Aggro -vs- Surviveability. Here you say that the Survivability of the other fighters has to be buffed to be closer to that of Guard.......yet Guards should not get any boost to aggro and in fact Guard aggro was actually nerfed? So your only measure of balance uses variables that cannot be treated as equals? How is that even balance or fair?/derail off.Group Moderate would be very much welcomed to make grouping abit less frustrating. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Survivability had to be buffed for the others because it was too far behind. Yes it is Agro v Survivability. Guards in RoK had the best of both, hence why the other 3 were brought much closer. It was not uncommon to see Guards MT and Guards OT in the same raid in RoK. SOE closed the gap some on survivability and increased agro on the other 3 tanks to make sure they are the most common choice for OT. Exactly the way this xpac is playing out.As far as Guards being the MT they are definitely more suited to the role. Even from the very start a Guard would be better to use to MT. The first 2 named in ToMC before people had crit mit you would set a Guard up to MT the named and have the OT scoop up the 2 adds. Snake it becomes even more apparant since its not like agro is an issue and you have the tank on the mob that can soak the most damage. Xebnok 2 ways you can run it, 1 is using the Guard who with reinforce being up pretty fast can climb the hate list with another tank...or allowing Guard to sit there and tank and having OT rip it for the charm. Gynok tanked by MT while OT scoops all the adds. Guard can easily time blocks to absorb DT.Palace. 1st encounter is a joke but hey what do you know single mobs that are easily held by a Guard who soaks more damage. Switchmaster, single mob for a Guard MT...level debuff means Guard survival tools are even better along with Recapture for when the Guard needs to ditch the mob momentarily. A-dude solo mob for Guard to handle. Tythus Guard MT's easily controls mob while OT takes care of adds. Penta single mob. Mynzak single mob. Anashti Guard MTs while OT handles adds....damage shield makes it good for going pretty hard survival.YIS. Stalker...single mob that is great to have interrupts on..OT handles the add. Kultak single mob while OT scoops up trash. Tyrannus...single mob while OT handles trash. FG...probably the first fight where an AE tank is a better choice, Guard swaps role and handles adds. Ykesha....see Gynok.MMB. First encounter honestly is a tank fest with all tanks fighting for agro since all the mobs are wiping. 2nd mob...ST. 3rd mob ST with single adds (hint hint Guards can also OT single adds). Gozak.....Avatar MTs. Munzok...Guard MTs with another sort of like Xebnok while OT handles all the inc adds. Miraguls. First named ST with annoying adds. Haladan Guard with another tank fighting for agro. 3rd named ST icy man. 4th named ST with annoying chest adds that are OT'd. QQ ST since everybody basically just AEs adds without targetting..just annoying adds. Miragul...ST with couple trash adds every couple min.So, Guards do not have any trouble with ST agro. They have the best survivability. And all those encounters just show that the Guard playstyle plays into it....excluding possibly FG depending on how you do it. The problem is that you are not playing progression. The mobs you are taking down are the mobs in progression that were taken down very early and before everybody was at 200 AAs. The problem you have is you are actually geared/AA'd past your current progression but you guys aren't actually progressing. WoE armor did not exist when the first few mobs in a zone were progression. People did not have all their masters and max AAs when those mobs were considered progression. Now go throw on VP armor and somehow revert your AAs back to 150-160 AAs and go run those first few mobs. We are at the end of an expansion, you can be fully mastered in no time, WoE gear is almost as good as x4 gear and easily obtained with smart loot......and you wonder why it doesn't feel like progression? You are already geared beyond where you should be. Even so, all those encounters are designed as a ST tank tanking the big mob with OT scooping adds if there are adds. Guard role.

Landiin

11-19-2009, 08:09 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>WoE is a x2 zone and yes there are spots like the books where I can see why you would want one of the other tanks over a Guard tanking it. Wait, it is a x2, bring 2 tanks...let the OT handle the large AE trash....it is the same principle.</blockquote>Bring 2 tanks to WoE? Why [Removed for Content] your raid like that?.....just bring a single SK and fill that other slot with something actually needed instead of first wasting the MT slot on Guard and then filling the uneeded OT spot with a SK. Double waste.At no point in progression is Guard the best choice to MT WoE and the other so called easy raids. Unless there are no good SK/Pally/Zerker available.....bringing a Guard to WoE is charity.Actually while I haven't progressed as far as you have....I have yet to see any raid target where SK wasn't the clear best choice to MT. So now not only are you saying that Guards only purpose is to MT raids........its only upper tier raiding and we're suppose to be happy taking charity spots during the lower tiers of progression?Also in another thread you said that fighter balance is just about Aggro -vs- Surviveability. Here you say that the Survivability of the other fighters has to be buffed to be closer to that of Guard.......yet Guards should not get any boost to aggro and in fact Guard aggro was actually nerfed? So your only measure of balance uses variables that cannot be treated as equals? How is that even balance or fair?/derail off.Group Moderate would be very much welcomed to make grouping abit less frustrating. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>.. Tons of fail..</blockquote>Guard aggro on one mob and many mobs is just as bad without hate transfer. Go back and argue with Bc over the dumb helm.

Beghauns

11-19-2009, 10:51 PM

Would help grouping a bit but I don't group on my guard anymore since its so much easier on my pally. Survivability is useless if you cannot keep agro and the only way to have a shot at agro is dual wielding which hurts survivability . If they're going to change something I'd prefer it was to help with agro when your actually looking like a tank and not a scout.

thial

11-19-2009, 11:04 PM

i love reading bruener trying to defend the op SK till his last breath gotta give him respect for that but only that. Give crusaders a nerf to survivability and the dps/agro advantage would be fine it would actually make people think hmm do we want almost 100% agro or super survivability...right now if you have the choice of sk or guard there is really no reason to pick the guard accept to be loyal...But I think in the next expac if soe follows there trend of copying wow each tank will be able to spec for any role and spec is going to be the deciding factor not class.....and to add i had a discusion with my guilds Sk and he said sk really do need a nurf to hate its to much...than i said yea but i dont think they should nerf sk they should just buff warriors cause we dont want things to go back how they where and his response was i never had issues other sk's just need to learn to play....hes not a craptastic SK that complained all the time pre tso like others had, he actually knew how to play his class and when we raided in past expansions he always gave me a run for agro but he was hate buffed, now with no hate buffs hes gota back off often...

Bruener

11-19-2009, 11:14 PM

<cite>Jdark@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>i love reading bruener trying to defend the op SK till his last breath gotta give him respect for that but only that. Give crusaders a nerf to survivability and the dps/agro advantage would be fine it would actually make people think hmm do we want almost 100% agro or super survivability...right now if you have the choice of sk or guard there is really no reason to pick the guard accept to be loyal...But I think in the next expac if soe follows there trend of copying wow each tank will be able to spec for any role and spec is going to be the deciding factor not class.....and to add i had a discusion with my guilds Sk and he said sk really do need a nurf to hate its to much...than i said yea but i dont think they should nerf sk they should just buff warriors cause we dont want things to go back how they where and his response was i never had issues other sk's just need to learn to play....hes not a craptastic SK that complained all the time pre tso like others had, he actually knew how to play his class and when we raided in past expansions he always gave me a run for agro but he was hate buffed, now with no hate buffs hes gota back off often...</blockquote>Wow that was a cute story. It brought a tear to my eye even.....whats that SKs name so I can look him up and thank him for his supposedly awesome insight...Seriously you gotta love a few Guards being greedy and asking to be the best in everything again instead of recognizing a few tweaks would put them right back on track throughout the area they have trouble in....heroic.

thial

11-19-2009, 11:24 PM

heh well if you where smart you would look up my guild and relise there is only one sk in my guild but here my version was the short version but yea he just told you to L2P bru cause you where one of the big complainers pre tso worse than the guards....<img src="http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr288/p0rn0mike/agrochat.jpg?t=1258683703" width="840" height="534" />

Rahatmattata

11-20-2009, 12:34 AM

Responding to brownie's useless tears of his impending nerf just makes long annoying threads. He likes to make his presence on the guard boards and drop his 2 squirts of who gives a f. to interrupt the flow of guards discussing game mechanics with each other. Gaylon you should really just let him troll IMO, as nothing he says has any value, and his idea of balance exists in some perpendicular dimension of reality. You don't have to respond to his empty-minded ramblings, and you can change his mind of nothing.<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Of course it would help.......especially at the segment of content where Guards really struggle. Its not gonna all the sudden make things easy-mode but it would help tone down some of the frustration we currently face.Curious what you think it is Guards need?At this point the best we can hope for is table scraps....asking for the 7 course meal like SKs got is not gonna be very fruitful.</blockquote>Sentry Watch, when group member is hit has 50% chance to increase hate position by 1 and increase the duration. When Battle cry is up is hold the line is giving a 100% proc rate All group stone skins will increase hate towards the guardian excluding self stone skins Recapture should affect the caster, increasing the position of other fighters by 2 and by 1 to the caster, a longer recast might be needed. Those first four ideas I can't take credit for. JDark came up with them, and I think they are pretty sweet idears tbh. This does not make us OP by giving us easy-mode sustained aggro, only helps a touch with sustained hate (battle cry), and helps get mobs back onto us after they rip. I think when UW procs it should increase our mitigation by a base % because you know... it's unyielding will. Like you just got your *** kicked, and now you have a second wind... renewed determination... and when your heart currently explodes, you should instead suffer some sort of burn-out, maybe a full rez sickness for an equal duration? A bonus would be if they worked it to not trigger if there is already a death save on you. In fact, they should make it so if you have a death save on you, noone else can cast theirs until the one on you expires or is used.Cry of the Warrior increased the hit rate and quit making mobs 100% immune to target locks, unless on a certain encounter it would make the encounter completely trivial... but mobs should not be designed in such a fashion as to need to annul a class's emergancy abilities in the first place.

Bruener

11-20-2009, 01:00 AM

<cite>Jdark@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>heh well if you where smart you would look up my guild and relise there is only one sk in my guild but here my version was the short version but yea he just told you to L2P bru cause you where one of the big complainers pre tso worse than the guards....<img src="http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr288/p0rn0mike/agrochat.jpg?t=1258683703" width="840" height="534" /></blockquote>Wow, exactly what I thought. Somebody I have never even heard of that raids the first couple mobs in each zone giving some sympathy to the Guard that can't hold agro. Pathetic at best. Tell no-name he has no clue what he is talking about since the obvious fixes to the SK class were long overdue. And yes I was vocal back than because unlike Guards in this xpac SKs basically sat at the bottom of agro/survivability/dps. He is lucky he can play a class that I helped pave the way to ensure he could actually be in a raid.That being said....the issue is hate for Guards at the heroic level, like the OP has been trying to address. I responded to this thread because I agree with him on a group moderate and because the thread was not originally in the Guard forums. 3 things that I think would give Guards the boost that they really need in the area they are actually lacking...1. Group Moderate - the biggest issue solver by minimizing agro trouble tremendously2. Taunt crit bonus increasing AA. 1% per AA max of 8. Means Guards will have the highest taunts, but not OP'd.3. 1 true AE taunt. Nothing nearly as large as Gibe but something to grab the AE mobs initially which is where a lot of the problem on true AE fights is.Now I know a few of you are living the dream hoping that SOE will listen to you to make Guards OP'd again....but tbh that time has come and gone with RoK. At least be realistic about what you need and stop acting like the class is broken. I am sure all the Guards that are MT'ing all of the raid content out there would disagree with you.

Netty

11-20-2009, 07:37 AM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Netty wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Guardians are fine, SKs are just overpowered. Guardians should never be the de facto main tank as they were before.</blockquote>You dont play a guard.. you know nothing on how a guard work. If guards can be the best MT we need the nerf all the other tanks both in grouping aoe solo and dps. Is that what you want?Im sick of ppl coming and saying guards are fine... Can you MT with a guard? yes. Can you MT with any of the other tank classes? Yes. the gap is to close tho. all tanks should be able to MT aye i agree. And they always could. and i did agree they needed to closen the gap back in the days. But it was over done as most other things. . .If guards are fine why are they so demanding on DWing to keep aggro? Does that make them more defensiv?If guards are fine why is it that any other tank can fill the MT spot but guards cant OT fine on adds and stuff?If guards are fine why are they the worste tank class hands down in the solo cont?Since you talk like you do i guess you play a pally. A hint for you they are as OP as SK:s atm.Back to the topic Moderate group wide wont do much to help the guard class. Leave it as it is imo.</blockquote>Of course it would help.......especially at the segment of content where Guards really struggle. Its not gonna all the sudden make things easy-mode but it would help tone down some of the frustration we currently face.Curious what you think it is Guards need?At this point the best we can hope for is table scraps....asking for the 7 course meal like SKs got is not gonna be very fruitful.</blockquote>I tell why this wouldent help the class. Whats the problem guards have with heroic cont atm? Aoe aggro. It doesent matter if a class have less hate than you if you dont have any tools to provide aggro.What would help the guard class? A small boost and fixing some of the def tools the guard have. And a litle boost in hate somehow. fix the myth. Guards arnt ment to be heroic tanks. Can they tank heroic cont? aye. None is asking to be best at everything as Brueners secret mate he talks to in is head are... Guard need a small boost in MT raids to be worth the lack of the rest...I say it again sure all tanks should be able to MT but guards need to have a easier time doing so.I can name a ton of things that would help the guard class.SW. Make it raid wide.UW. Remove exploding heart.Mit buffs make the group one into something els like add a 5 secs aoe block or something. Since lets face it for a geared guard the mit buffs does kinda much nothing atm since we are to high in it as it is.. Or add crit mit on it when its up thats a good idea aswell imo.That root thingy.. Makes caster immune to KB... Caster will still be rooted tho.And remove shield dmg on ToS sure you can avoid it with a shield change but its still not needed anymore.Myth. Make the dmg reduction 10% again and make it up all time. And add 25% inc dmg to hate as on the zerk one. Remove the damage proc and add a bane taunt for 2-3k or something.HL. make it proc 100%.There you have a few things.

Davngr1

11-20-2009, 09:19 AM

<cite>Netty wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Guardians are fine, SKs are just overpowered. Guardians should never be the de facto main tank as they were before.</blockquote>You dont play a guard.. you know nothing on how a guard work. If guards can be the best MT we need the nerf all the other tanks both in grouping aoe solo and dps. Is that what you want?Im sick of ppl coming and saying guards are fine... Can you MT with a guard? yes. Can you MT with any of the other tank classes? Yes. the gap is to close tho. all tanks should be able to MT aye i agree. And they always could. and i did agree they needed to closen the gap back in the days. But it was over done as most other things. . .If guards are fine why are they so demanding on DWing to keep aggro? Does that make them more defensiv? also when DW guards loose their two most effective longevity abilitysIf guards are fine why is it that any other tank can fill the MT spot but guards cant OT fine on adds and stuff?If guards are fine why are they the worste tank class hands down in the solo cont?Since you talk like you do i guess you play a pally. A hint for you they are as OP as SK:s atm.Back to the topic Moderate group wide wont do much to help the guard class. Leave it as it is imo.</blockquote>QFT well said netty i would like to add to that, that you can't just subtract hate and expect guards to be balanced, the fact is that zerks and sk's got gaurd like longevity abilitys but guards still have [Removed for Content] poor agression generation.

thial

11-20-2009, 10:29 AM

hah checking my gear and his and just about everyone elses gear in my guild tells you we kill more than just a few mobs in each zone....I will say though your 1-3 list is ok but add number 4 nerf SK to where there hate generation is = to that of a zerker, SK just creates to much un needed hate.sorry to derailgroup moderate would be a good start as i said before but there is more to it than that..

EverRude

11-20-2009, 10:55 AM

You guys really seem to be having the same arguments. I had uselessly hoped that asking for this moderate change and avoiding discussion about other changes, that could give guards AE abilites close to that of crusaders and zerkers I could avoid the usual flamefest these threads always degenerate into. Moderate is clearly well suited to aid guardians bridge the gap between our low often resisted taunts, our now low dps, and the high aggro dps classes are generating. It alraedy does this and it makes a difference. It will not allow a low dps guard tank for an very high dps class. So it's not OP now for it current purpose. The problem now is that a lot of dps classes and even a lot of utillity classes are putting out enough damage to rip from guard and moderating one member of the group is akin to slapping a bandaid on severed neck. Group wide or multitarget moderate would at least give us a fighting chance to be a tank and not just a rodeo clown. Let me have that and I can play my guard again knowing my survivability means something. Why can't we leave the truly heavy AE zones to be the easy fun zones they are now for those tanks? I know that if my guard could handle CoA as well as my SK it would be my SK gathering dust. When a group needs a real tank because of a weak priest or or hard hitting mob they'll call us. If they want easy play through AE trash and weaker bosses they can call them. If a group simply needs a atnk they won't automatically rule us out like they are now. When they want us to tank AE they'll simply have to learn to play.

thial

11-20-2009, 11:01 AM

Just wait for beta in the the next expac thats where suggestion will be most heard, hopefully. Theres going to be no adjustment made to guards or nerfs to sk's this xpac...Hope fully some good people that understand and truly want balance get into beta first.

EverRude

11-20-2009, 11:30 AM

Nerfs to SK's would nothing to help us. Sure it would make SK's less diserable but as it stands do you think groups will suddenly see guards as the replacement? No chance. It'll just become the all Pally and token zerker show. If they do make crits taunt that will help us but it also makes the other tanks better leaving us where we are, the bottom tank. And I also doubt taunt crit will bridge the gap in taunt vs dps as it currently stands. Not unless they adjust the base amounts of taunts to boot. Also keep in mind that the change I'm suggesting does not make us more powerful in regards to taunt or dps. It just allows us to bit more flexible with our group makeup in heroic zones. Something the crusaders can already do. Just to be safe tho I'm leveling my beserker and pally. I might even do a bruiser and monk. Just to be sure I can tank no matter what SOE does.

RafaelSmith

11-20-2009, 11:48 AM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>When a group needs a real tank because of a weak priest or or hard hitting mob they'll call us. If they want easy play through AE trash and weaker bosses they can call them. If a group simply needs a atnk they won't automatically rule us out like they are now. When they want us to tank AE they'll simply have to learn to play.</blockquote>What do you mean by real tank? There is not a single heroic encounter where SK is at any disadvantage. Your never gonna see a instance group seek out a Guard because a Guard is needed.AE tanks are the superset of ST tanks........A group that brings an SK gets a tank that can tank and hold aggro on any content. Any tank that can mass pull/lock aggro on rooms of mobs is not gonna have any problems on pesky single targets.This whole AE -vs- ST crap is just plain stupid....no way to balance two things where one is the superset of the other.

EverRude

11-20-2009, 12:38 PM

You I meant to edit that "real tank" comment out to avoid [Removed for Content] off the other plate tanks uneccessarily but forgot. Little did I realize it would be another guard to take note. First keep in we ARE talking heroic content and heroic players. Not raiders doing shard runs. Or fabled and mythical "casual" players. Enough OP raiders in a group and the wizard can tank the zone. If they have a guard for a tank the wizard probably is. With a good healers (especially myth, fabled, all mastered) yes any tank is good enough which ofcourse is why us guards can and will tank dual weilding and in O stance. And ofcourse with enough dps the mobs don't live long enough to kill any but the most squishy and unluckly (death curses on pull...). However, as I mentioned, I want flexibility in group makeup. Which means the ability to not only bring high dps, or run without hate transfer, but to also run with a less than stellar healer. Also keep in mind we're all gonna be leveling up agin in a few months. We just might find that our surviability is needed again. Something that will be useless if the aggro issue isn't fixed. So in tier 9 it may be a decsion for some groups to run a guard and 1 healer or another tank and perhaps 2 healers provided the mobs are tough and hit hard. As it is, that guard be left in the closet and groups will just to whatever they have to to keep whatever other tank they bring alive.Please do try to keep in mind that altho many, if not most, groups these days can chew through Deep Forge in 10 min or less, not all can. Some groups still die there. Especially if they have a subpar healer and barely adequate dps. It is my sincere hope that someday there will be heroic content that guards will need their shields and defensive stance again.

Bruener

11-20-2009, 12:40 PM

<cite>Jdark@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>hah checking my gear and his and just about everyone elses gear in my guild tells you we kill more than just a few mobs in each zone....I will say though your 1-3 list is ok but add number 4 nerf SK to where there hate generation is = to that of a zerker, SK just creates to much un needed hate.sorry to derailgroup moderate would be a good start as i said before but there is more to it than that..</blockquote>I look at your gear and I see a mix of the first few encounters in a zone in TSO with gear from SoH. That tells me a lot about where you are at. Sorry. As for unneeded hate I guarantee that I put out a ton more hate than your SK and my Guard is MT. Yes on trash I can give him a hard time...if I want to. But the fact is I play to make things easier for the raid and most of the time that means not ripping agro. That means not using my Trak shield clicky until it is a place I know I need it. That means making sure hate buffs aren't on me unless I am actually going to be tanking. The person you have hate keeping off of the most is your SK, and thats because he does not know what he is doing. Other than him I would wager your hate is enough to be fine against everybody else in the raid.Furthermore Paladin hate supercedes SK hate by a long ways. They can DPS almost as much plus they get the huge amends from a ST. If anything Zerkers need a slight raise to agro to put them on par with Crusaders for the OT competition. You are complaining about SKs having "unneeded" hate.....that seems pretty dumb. So you admit that really a tank only needs so much hate, hence a Guard can hold hate from an entire raid, and yet you want them to strip that "unneeded" hate from the others. To be more accurate you really don't play the Guard right and are jealous of the OT spot. If you want to OT you should have rolled an OT class.To the OP, sorry that once again people have derailed your post. I tried hard to support the original post and imput ideas for it. Its the fact that some people are way too greedy and will not be satisfied unless Guards become OP'd again. They are really going to be in a let down next xpac when they realize that it just isn't going to happen. Way too many good players playing all types of tanks to let that happen in Beta.

EverRude

11-20-2009, 02:22 PM

Bruener I am surprised you're supporting any changes to guardians whatsoever. You typically seem focused on pinning guards to raid MT position and have no sympathy for anyone wanting to play guard in any other venue. I sincerely appreciate your support here even though your usual posts make me wanna choke you. Thank you. Wondering tho, why? Is it because my suggestion in reality does very little and will not upset the status quo? Or do you see that perhaps a heroic guard is in fact a valid playstyle and could benefit from some tweaks to make it more viable in today's game?I do love my SK and really would prefer he not have to take backseat to anyone in heroic content. I know that solo he'll continue to rule. As far as raiding goes I am doing my best to ensure my suggestions don't upset what little balance there is there. I do not raid beyond some x2 stuff with my dirge. So I don't bother making suggestions for it. So as for Heroic content goes...We have 4 tank classes. Each of them has gone through periods of percieved and usually real OP status over the years, except perhaps beserkers. But IMO they are the best balanced tanks. Most of the rest of us had atleast 1 time we were THE tank. It's SK right now. Several classes can still do the job but SK is best right now. What I believe is, there's no such thing as balance for tanks. If there was we'd all be essentially the same class. I feel that what SOE and we should be pushing for is balance in the content. I don't like the AE vs ST argument one bit but it could work. To some extent. Content needs to be balanced SOME AE and ST in every zone. Placed in such a way that it is not required to pull multiple encounters at once but it is an option. That way any tank can do the zone but the AE focused tanks can shine by doing it faster. Our (guards) problem is that some TSO content simply cannot be done this way. Some zones will hit you with 2 or 3 or more multi mob encounter groups and we have next to no skill to handle it. Zones like Crucible and Necrotic Assylum are great examples of what I am saying. SK can handle everything in this zones in multiples if the group can handle the dps before to healer goes OOM. But a Guard in a perfect group of smart players can do it too. They're great zones. More zones like this and none like CoA, Outer stronghold, or PoF would make good balance.This is why I have made this suggestion. Give me group moderate to lessen my need for the perfect group and my vulnerabilty to multiple high dps group members and I could compete with other tanks in nearly every current zone. Hopefully the content will be balanced like I stated and I doubt tank balance will be an issueSK will still be a prime tank if not the best for heroic but guards can do the job very well. Guards will be prime tank but any other tank can still do the job very well. Ya know? I think I am incapable of making a short post....sorry.

EverRude

11-20-2009, 03:24 PM

Oh btw I know this oppinion on balance will not be popular with most other guards. Believe me I prefer my guards playstyle and would love for him to have more ae skills (blue taunts and such) but I just feel that is a fultile fight.Honestly ask youselves. If you were choosing a tank for a group and you could choose a guard with superior survivabilty or a SK with more dps which would you choose?The answer should be, it depends on the group.But it's not. IF aggro was not an issue (which it is for guards right now) then the answer right now is, it depends on the zone. SK is always a good answer but guard aren't due to the AE content of some zones. Balance the content the the answer would be as it should be... What tank you want should depend on the group makeup. The problem for us now the content favor SK especially in the highest difficulty zones. Change that content and things balance out. Fix the aggro problem we have starting with the groupwide Moderate I suggest and we will be viable tanks again. Fix the content in the next expansion as I suggest (after the aggro fix) and tanks are balanced. Except maybe beserkers but that's their problem :p

thial

11-20-2009, 05:46 PM

7/7 tso t4 armor yes thats from the first few names in a zone. Most people that kill the first few mobs are in 4-5 not 7/7 and could only dream of killing anashti gynok zar or fg. We have not killed yek but we will once we gear up the recruits. Thanks for proving how ignorant you really are, again. And why don't you open up your profile so we can see what gear your sporting or what guild your in, not doubting what you kill but if your so great why hide it? I'm proud of where my guard is there is little room for gear upgrades for him unless I started avatar slaying which is not for me I like my set schedule.

Bruener

11-20-2009, 07:23 PM

There ya go. I opened up my profile I believe. Its not like I have been hiding it, its just that since I created my log-in back at launch I have not even been in my profile to even see what is in there. I have posted links on eq2players to my toon and I definitely have nothing to hide. As far as gear gratz (your supposedly awesome SK is not sporting such gear). And amazingly you are MT'ing over this SK that supposedly can easily rip agro off you. There is a reason that you MT and not him....so are you going to tell me that you are too dense to realize that?Anyhow, stop throwing threads off on a tangent. This is about group moderate. And it would definitely go a long ways to help at the heroic level...unless of course you disagree with that statement. I mean isn't the whole problem controlling agro off of DPS?

Lethe5683

11-21-2009, 02:02 AM

<cite>Netty wrote:</cite><blockquote> You dont play a guard.. you know nothing on how a guard work. If guards can be the best MT we need the nerf all the other tanks both in grouping aoe solo and dps. Is that what you want? I didn't say they can't be the best MT. I said they can't be the only viable MT as they were in RoK. The way they are now is a lot more balanced relative to where they should be. Comparing them to OP classes like SK then of course they are going to seem lacking. Guards now need maybe a few minor adjustments but nothing big. Im sick of ppl coming and saying guards are fine... Can you MT with a guard? yes. Can you MT with any of the other tank classes? Yes. the gap is to close tho. all tanks should be able to MT aye i agree. Which is the way it's supposed to be. Do you think that it was right for guards to be the best by far as they were? If guards are fine why are they so demanding on DWing to keep aggro? Does that make them more defensiv? They aren't... any guard that can't keep aggro vs an equally geared DPS class without dual wielding is incompetent. Enough said. If guards are fine why is it that any other tank can fill the MT spot but guards cant OT fine on adds and stuff? Because SKs are freaking overpowered, guards can OT decently though so I don't know where you are getting that from. If guards are fine why are they the worste tank class hands down in the solo cont? Because they are supposed to be the best defensive tank for groups and especially for raiding, the problem is however that other tanks are still able to become almost as defensive as guards while having far superior aggro ability. This is not because guards are underpowered but because said other tanks are vastly overpowered. Since you talk like you do i guess you play a pally. A hint for you they are as OP as SK:s atm. HA, yeah right. I play a bruiser which, here's a hint for you are much worse off than guards. Back to the topic Moderate group wide wont do much to help the guard class. Leave it as it is imo.</blockquote>

Davngr1

11-21-2009, 09:13 AM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Netty wrote:</cite><blockquote>You dont play a guard.. you know nothing on how a guard work. If guards can be the best MT we need the nerf all the other tanks both in grouping aoe solo and dps. Is that what you want?I didn't say they can't be the best MT. I said they can't be the only viable MT as they were in RoK. The way they are now is a lot more balanced relative to where they should be. Comparing them to OP classes like SK then of course they are going to seem lacking. Guards now need maybe a few minor adjustments but nothing big. in rok ONLY mythical guards where overpowerd, the average non-myth guard was NOT over powerd in ANY way.. yes it was a single target expansion so it highlighted the single target superiority of the class.. SK's are not overpowerd, after GU 53 all the procs that alowed crusaders to achive rediculs dps are GONE.. get over it.. leave SK as they are suppose to be a dam good offensive tank!Im sick of ppl coming and saying guards are fine... Can you MT with a guard? yes. Can you MT with any of the other tank classes? Yes. the gap is to close tho. all tanks should be able to MT aye i agree.Which is the way it's supposed to be. Do you think that it was right for guards to be the best by far as they were? the guard CLASS was never over powerd.. only mythcal guards where.. how many times are idots going to bring up this moot point....If guards are fine why are they so demanding on DWing to keep aggro? Does that make them more defensiv?They aren't... any guard that can't keep aggro vs an equally geared DPS class without dual wielding is incompetent. Enough said. do you play a guard? i do, and yes it's very hard to impossible to do my job as a tank. my job being controling encounters. AND yes i have to DW and loose easy acces to my two saves to be able to have fun and make the group fun and succesful for others..If guards are fine why is it that any other tank can fill the MT spot but guards cant OT fine on adds and stuff?Because SKs are freaking overpowered, guards can OT decently though so I don't know where you are getting that from. SK's are not over powerd and guards CAN NOT OT because their aoe aggression generation is [Removed for Content] poor! further more.. why have a guard OT when you can rock another tank that has more agro, more utillity and more dps?If guards are fine why are they the worste tank class hands down in the solo cont?Because they are supposed to be the best defensive tank for groups and especially for raiding, the problem is however that other tanks are still able to become almost as defensive as guards while having far superior aggro ability. This is not because guards are underpowered but because said other tanks are vastly overpowered. mobs in TSO(and comming expansions im sure) hit hard and that is why they gave the other tanks longevity abilitys like guards. the problem is that they did not give guards any offensive tank abilitys or superior longevity abilitys. INSTEAD devs decided to NERF their AA. Since you talk like you do i guess you play a pally. A hint for you they are as OP as SK:s atm.HA, yeah right. I play a bruiser which, here's a hint for you are much worse off than guards. i play a bruiser too.. and yes they need TRUE aoe attack like other tanks but i still rather take my bruiser to an instance or raid over my guard. what does that tell you?Back to the topic Moderate group wide wont do much to help the guard class. Leave it as it is imo.</blockquote></blockquote>

Lethe5683

11-21-2009, 09:46 AM

<cite>Netty wrote:</cite><blockquote> SK's are not overpowerd, </blockquote>Ok you lost me there, I don't even know how to respond to something like that...

Davngr1

11-21-2009, 10:10 AM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote> SK's are not overpowerd, </blockquote>Ok you lost me there, I don't even know how to respond to something like that...</blockquote> like i said.. after GU 53 nerfing procs so they could not be modified with crit or base damge, took away the huge dps numbers the class could achive before. SK' right now are a solid tank. fixing guard issues has nothing to do with nerfing SK or any other class. by your logic SK along with zerk and even pally should be nerfed.. because THEY ALL generate more aggression then a guard YET have almost the same longevity. see how dumb that is? see how that leads to one class being over power and the rest being crap?

Lethe5683

11-22-2009, 01:54 AM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote> SK's are not overpowerd, </blockquote>Ok you lost me there, I don't even know how to respond to something like that...</blockquote> like i said.. after GU 53 nerfing procs so they could not be modified with crit or base damge, took away the huge dps numbers the class could achive before. SK' right now are a solid tank. fixing guard issues has nothing to do with nerfing SK or any other class. by your logic SK along with zerk and even pally should be nerfed.. because THEY ALL generate more aggression then a guard YET have almost the same longevity. see how dumb that is? see how that leads to one class being over power and the rest being crap? </blockquote>They all generate more aggression yes and they should. The problem is that they have almost the same ability to mitigate damage, they need to have their defensive abilities (not their dps) nerfed significantly. DPS wise I think all the fighters (except brawlers) are very very close to were they should be.

Paikis

11-22-2009, 03:39 AM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>currently moderate is a tad to weak and should reduce hate of the group by atleast 40%, also that it should be an option for it to either be cast single or on the group similier to pledge of armament on paladins.</blockquote>So you want a group dehate buff that is better than the troubador version?No.

Rahatmattata

11-22-2009, 05:03 AM

And the avoidance component too.What guard would want to be in a group with a troubador anyway? Dirge plz!

Lethe5683

11-23-2009, 01:22 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>And the avoidance component too.What guard would want to be in a group with a troubador anyway? Dirge plz!</blockquote>Not a chance, that would be rediculously op.

EverRude

11-23-2009, 09:53 AM

How a group moderate or even multitarget moderate OP a guadian? Our dps is the lowest of all tanks, our hate generation is lowest (primarily due to the broken taunt system), and our survivabilty is only marginally better. Group moderate would allow the guards to bridge the gap between his low dps and the much higher dps of his group. Enough to allow his taunts to make a difference and not OP him. Seriously no average heroic T2 guard with fabled epic epic is suddenly going to be THE heroic tank because he suddenly has huge aggro advantage. Because he won't. If a 5k guard groups with a 8k wizard it shouldn't be too hard to hold. But a 10k wizard will be a challenge. A 15k wizard nearly impossible. My SK has held aggro on warlocks doing 30k damage on AE content and ZW 12k. My guard would be useless in that group as he stands now. Also this change will not help guards deal at all in high AE zones. So that leaves quite a few zone crusader/zerker only. Also please get off the guards had it easy for RoK BS. That only really applied for the guards Myth before the change. It lasted less than a year and it was heavily affected by the almost exclusively single encounter instance content. Had RoK been heavily AE like TSO guard would not have had the prime role. SK have now been the defacto prime tank for over a year in TSO. My suggestion merely gives the gaurd a fighting chance to hold aggro in heroic content with some flexibility in group setup.

Lethe5683

11-23-2009, 11:18 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>How a group moderate or even multitarget moderate OP a guadian? Our dps is the lowest of all tanks, our hate generation is lowest (primarily due to the broken taunt system), and our survivabilty is only marginally better.Guards need some AoE tweaking but it's mostly the crusaders that need their survivability (sk) or dps (paladin) lowered.Group moderate would allow the guards to bridge the gap between his low dps and the much higher dps of his group. Enough to allow his taunts to make a difference and not OP him. Seriously no average heroic T2 guard with fabled epic epic is suddenly going to be THE heroic tank because he suddenly has huge aggro advantage. Because he won't. If a 5k guard groups with a 8k wizard it shouldn't be too hard to hold. But a 10k wizard will be a challenge. A 15k wizard nearly impossible. My SK has held aggro on warlocks doing 30k damage on AE content and ZW 12k. My guard would be useless in that group as he stands now.Too bad, that's the way the tanks are designed seriously thats like an assassin complaining that warlocks out DPS them on large encounter fights.Also this change will not help guards deal at all in high AE zones. So that leaves quite a few zone crusader/zerker only.Yes it would help a lot to have every AoE DPS having their hate lowered.Also please get off the guards had it easy for RoK BS. That only really applied for the guards Myth before the change. It lasted less than a year and it was heavily affected by the almost exclusively single encounter instance content. Had RoK been heavily AE like TSO guard would not have had the prime role.I'm not saying that guards having it easy in RoK justifies anything I'm saying that we don't want them becoming that way again.SK have now been the defacto prime tank for over a year in TSO. My suggestion merely gives the gaurd a fighting chance to hold aggro in heroic content with some flexibility in group setup.No your suggestions easily overpowers guards making it incredibly easy for a somewhat skilled guardian to hold hate.</blockquote>

EverRude

11-24-2009, 08:35 AM

Lethe do you even play a guard? I know for a fact that even the single group member I moderate now can pull aggro from me if they can double my dps. With proper casting order and planning I can usually hold aggro for most fights. But unless reinforcement is up for every pull I will loose it eventually. The problem for us now is, with gear and skill, all the dps classes and even some of the supposed utility classes can rip. One person moderated in the group simply isn't enough.Oh sure I could stack my group with the perfect classes to fix my issues. But it is already a pain to form a PuG in good time it's much worse trying to hold out for specific classes. I am asking for some flexibilty. A chance for guards to compete. It is unrealistic to play a guard at all right now unless you already play exclusively with the perfect group. Unless you play a guard you really don't have a clue what it's like for them right now. Whatever though, if nothing changes I still have my very overpowered SK to play. No big deal.

Lethe5683

11-24-2009, 12:16 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lethe do you even play a guard? I know for a fact that even the single group member I moderate now can pull aggro from me if they can double my dps. With proper casting order and planning I can usually hold aggro for most fights. But unless reinforcement is up for every pull I will loose it eventually. The problem for us now is, with gear and skill, all the dps classes and even some of the supposed utility classes can rip. One person moderated in the group simply isn't enough.Oh sure I could stack my group with the perfect classes to fix my issues. But it is already a pain to form a PuG in good time it's much worse trying to hold out for specific classes. I am asking for some flexibilty. A chance for guards to compete. It is unrealistic to play a guard at all right now unless you already play exclusively with the perfect group. Unless you play a guard you really don't have a clue what it's like for them right now. Whatever though, if nothing changes I still have my very overpowered SK to play. No big deal.</blockquote>I have played a brawler tank for years, don't tell me I don't know what it's like to have problems tanking. If they double your DPS and are stealing aggro then either you aren't using taunts properly or that DPS class is being stupid. On my assassin I can easily do triple a guardians DPS without ripping hate for more than 1 second.

EverRude

11-24-2009, 04:26 PM

God I hate discussing this from my blackberry. Just lost a really long reply... I'll abridge this one. Brawlers and Assassins are not Guardians therefore, you sir do not have a clue what tactics a guard can and cannot use to hold aggro. I appreciate your feedback on the topic of moderate adjustment but you're going beyond. You're even suggesting changes to other classes you don't play. Feel free to make your own post about how you feel crusaders need [Removed for Content] defences.Or better yet, let me and the other plate tanks discuss the balance between us. You don't like my moderate idea that's cool. Would be nice for you to atleast give some real evidence to support the idea it would somehow overpower guards. Something hard that we can debate. Something I can see and agree with and / or make adjustments to my suggestion to prevent the potential OP situation. As it is your statement is a waste of my time.

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 04:31 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>you aren't using taunts properly</blockquote>LOL

Lethe5683

11-24-2009, 04:40 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>You don't like my moderate idea that's cool. Would be nice for you to atleast give some real evidence to support the idea it would somehow overpower guards. Something hard that we can debate. Something I can see and agree with and / or make adjustments to my suggestion to prevent the potential OP situation. As it is your statement is a waste of my time.</blockquote>Fine. The reason I am against the group moderate besides it being generally overpowered is because it would be a totally passive way to make a class better. It would be much better if guards got additional AoE hate generation tools rather than something like group amends. And even if you had the group amends moderate you have to agree that it would need to loose the avoidance buff component if it was made AoE. Also, I don't have to play a class to have a basic understanding of how it works. I'm not claiming to be a guardian expert or anything but I know enough to know that any guard having trouble holding aggro vs an equally geared DPS class, other than a warlock is simply not trying or not good enough.<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>you aren't using taunts properly</blockquote>LOL</blockquote>Most useless post ever.

EverRude

11-24-2009, 04:47 PM

One thing to reiterate for all concerned. This suggestion about moderate I am making is to help heroic guards in heroic content. A raid level guard playing heroic content and is in fact like every other raid player in heroic content, Overpowered. My moderate suggestion will have no impact at raid level and there's no danger of overpowering a raid level guard in heroic content since they already are OP like every other raider. So please keep that in mind when you post. We're talking about heroic guards in heroic content.Also despite others having posted about it I make no suggestion here about tweaking guard's AE abilities. Though I have posted at length about AE content. We're discussing adjusting Moderate to apply groupwide or multitarget. Thanks

EverRude

11-24-2009, 05:02 PM

Group amends? Good God that would be overpowered. Amends in it's single target form is OP but Guards don't have Amends we have Moderate. A far more lame version that only reduces another classes hate not give it to us.So how exactly does reducing the hate of my group 37% OP me? Any class doing 38% more damage than me will get aggro. Let me count the classes that can probably out damage my Guard by 38%... Gimme a second I have to pull my socks off... Sure in a low dps group this would be a cruise. However there is really no way to know for sure the PuG I joining is going to be low dps. This could be OP in the right group but no more so than SK and pally can already stack a group to make their high aggro even more so. Thanks for being specific. I can debate that.

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 05:15 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Most useless post ever.</blockquote>100 times more useful than anything your sausage fingers have mashed out on your keyboard. Don't make me delve into you rich 3.5k posting history.Nerf brawlers btw.

EverRude

11-24-2009, 05:16 PM

Oh and Rahat's LOL response to the not using taunts correctly comment was appropriate if not very helpful. Any guard... Any tank... knows taunts are crap and are only used when you have noting else to use. DPS is aggro. My autoattack generates more aggro than my taunts. No tank will use a taunt to generate hate if the opportunity to generate DPS exists instead. Snaps and specials are different. Had you suggested I wasn't using hunker or reinforcement or something else properly you would have been more correct. Just thought I'd clarify for Rahat. Assuming that is what he meant.

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 05:18 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh and Rahat's LOL response to the not using taunts correctly comment was appropriate if not very helpful. Any guard... Any tank... knows taunts are crap and are only used when you have noting else to use. DPS is aggro. My autoattack generates more aggro than my taunts. No tank will use a taunt to generate hate if the opportunity to generate DPS exists instead. Snaps and specials are different. Had you suggested I wasn't using hunker or reinforcement or something else properly you would have been more correct. Just thought I'd clarify for Rahat. Assuming that is what he meant.</blockquote>Pretty much. I mean, it's hard to push the 1 button on my keyboard to taunt a mob, but I've been practicing. Hopefully someday I can taunt like a champ just like Lethe.

Yimway

11-24-2009, 05:44 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>you aren't using taunts properly</blockquote>LOL</blockquote>Most useless post ever.</blockquote>His reply was exactly as relevant as your assertion.Taunt != AggroThere are exactly two things that are specific to the tank in aggro management, DPS and Snaps. Taunts are laughable and to only be used at such time you don't have a CA that crits more DPS than the taunt does aggro AND you can squeeze the taunt in without delaying an autoattack swing.Making Moderate multi castable would cause 0 balance issues. I wouldn't even use it, as I don't have the concentration space for it. However most heroic guards would and it would prove useful. I'd even go so far as to allow an aa that causes moderate to give 10% transfer for 15s.None of which is going to affect raid tanking significantly but would allow guards to be slightly more effective in groups not built aroud them.

Lethe5683

11-24-2009, 06:29 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Group amends? Good God that would be overpowered. Amends in it's single target form is OP but Guards don't have Amends we have Moderate. A far more lame version that only reduces another classes hate not give it to us.So how exactly does reducing the hate of my group 37% OP me? Any class doing 38% more damage than me will get aggro. Let me count the classes that can probably out damage my Guard by 38%... Gimme a second I have to pull my socks off... Sure in a low dps group this would be a cruise. However there is really no way to know for sure the PuG I joining is going to be low dps. This could be OP in the right group but no more so than SK and pally can already stack a group to make their high aggro even more so. Thanks for being specific. I can debate that.</blockquote>So you think amends single target is OP yet not group moderate...<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh and Rahat's LOL response to the not using taunts correctly comment was appropriate if not very helpful. Any guard... Any tank... knows taunts are crap and are only used when you have noting else to use. DPS is aggro. My autoattack generates more aggro than my taunts. No tank will use a taunt to generate hate if the opportunity to generate DPS exists instead. Snaps and specials are different. Had you suggested I wasn't using hunker or reinforcement or something else properly you would have been more correct. Just thought I'd clarify for Rahat. Assuming that is what he meant.</blockquote>Snaps ARE taunts.<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh and Rahat's LOL response to the not using taunts correctly comment was appropriate if not very helpful. Any guard... Any tank... knows taunts are crap and are only used when you have noting else to use. DPS is aggro. My autoattack generates more aggro than my taunts. No tank will use a taunt to generate hate if the opportunity to generate DPS exists instead. Snaps and specials are different. Had you suggested I wasn't using hunker or reinforcement or something else properly you would have been more correct. Just thought I'd clarify for Rahat. Assuming that is what he meant.</blockquote>Pretty much. I mean, it's hard to push the 1 button on my keyboard to taunt a mob, but I've been practicing. Hopefully someday I can taunt like a champ just like Lethe.</blockquote>Are you done spamming inane garbage?

Lethe5683

11-24-2009, 06:31 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>you aren't using taunts properly</blockquote>LOL</blockquote>Most useless post ever.</blockquote>His reply was exactly as relevant as your assertion.No it wasen't, his reply was stupid and worthless.Taunt != AggroThere are exactly two things that are specific to the tank in aggro management, DPS and Snaps. Taunts are laughable and to only be used at such time you don't have a CA that crits more DPS than the taunt does aggro AND you can squeeze the taunt in without delaying an autoattack swing.By taunts I was including snap aggro.I'd even go so far as to allow an aa that causes moderate to give 10% transfer for 15s.Now that would be a much better thing to add rather than group moderate.</blockquote>

EverRude

11-24-2009, 06:49 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>you aren't using taunts properly</blockquote>LOL</blockquote>Most useless post ever.</blockquote>His reply was exactly as relevant as your assertion.No it wasen't, his reply was stupid and worthless.Taunt != AggroThere are exactly two things that are specific to the tank in aggro management, DPS and Snaps. Taunts are laughable and to only be used at such time you don't have a CA that crits more DPS than the taunt does aggro AND you can squeeze the taunt in without delaying an autoattack swing.By taunts I was including snap aggro.Snap aggro would not hold aggro off your assassin as you were saying your guardian groupmate was doing He could pull aggro from you for a second but unless you had barely gotten it, by being stupid, you are gonna get it right back. Snap are life saves. They do not generate hate (most of them) and only move the tank up the hatelist. The tank still has to have the hate generation to stay there. The snaps won't help him there. We're simply pointing out it takes more than learning to use taunts (or using snaps) to tank as a guardian or any other tank.Making Moderate multi castable would cause 0 balance issues. I wouldn't even use it, as I don't have the concentration space for it. However most heroic guards would and it would prove useful. I'd even go so far as to allow an aa that causes moderate to give 10% transfer for 15s.Now that would be a much better thing to add rather than group moderate.I fixed the quote for you. Would hate for you to take Antan's comments out of context Atan said he would add a hate tranfer to the multitarget moderate. Which would would make it even more powerful. You say that would be much better. Kudos to you for making my suggestion even more powerful and more like a group amends. Though temporaily, as Atan suggests.</blockquote></blockquote>And yes Amends not only lowers the targets hate by a good perentage it, gives that same percentage hate gain to the tank (Paladin) (tho I am not a paladin so I do not know the exact numbers at cap so it may not be quite as OP as I state here which is why I typically leave Pallies out of these discussions). If they target the highest dps they automatically generate more hate that the highest DPS and by default are generating more hate than every other dps in the group. Moderate simply lowers the target's hate. It does not boost the Guards hate in any way. It is [Removed for Content] compared to amends and would be [Removed for Content] compared to amends even in multitarget form.

Lethe5683

11-24-2009, 07:09 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite>Snap aggro would not hold aggro off your assassin as you were saying your guardian groupmate was doing He could pull aggro from you for a second but unless you had barely gotten it, by being stupid, you are gonna get it right back. Snap are life saves. They do not generate hate (most of them) and only move the tank up the hatelist. The tank still has to have the hate generation to stay there. The snaps won't help him there. We're simply pointing out it takes more than learning to use taunts (or using snaps) to tank as a guardian or any other tank.It works fine if the DPS class is not being an idiot.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite>I fixed the quote for you. Would hate for you to take Antan's comments out of context Atan said he would add a hate tranfer to the multitarget moderate. Which would would make it even more powerful. You say that would be much better. Kudos to you for making my suggestion even more powerful and more like a group amends. Though temporaily, as Atan suggests.Why do you think I only quoted that one part? Because I was only agreeing with adding hate transfer to moderate as it is now.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite>And yes Amends not only lowers the targets hate by a good perentage it, gives that same percentage hate gain to the tank (Paladin) (tho I am not a paladin so I do not know the exact numbers at cap so it may not be quite as OP as I state here which is why I typically leave Pallies out of these discussions). If they target the highest dps they automatically generate more hate that the highest DPS and by default are generating more hate than every other dps in the group. Moderate simply lowers the target's hate. It does not boost the Guards hate in any way. It is [Removed for Content] compared to amends and would be [Removed for Content] compared to amends even in multitarget form.It does not automatically make them the highest hate generator. It only transfers part of the targets hate to the paladin. As it is moderate is [Removed for Content] compared to amends but group moderate would be significantly better than amends. Not only would it decrease everyone elses hate generation but it would also gives a avoidance buff to every group member.

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 08:46 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>his reply was stupid and worthless.</blockquote><blockquote>You said something dumb that made me laugh out loud. Sorry if my stupid and worthless reply to your stupid and worthless assessment offends you.</blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>By taunts I was including snap aggro.</blockquote> I'm new and didn't realize reinforcement is a taunt. You're right that it is challenging to push reinforcement when you lose aggro. Because that's about the only ability worth pushing, besides maybe sentry watch, or intercede. Surely you realize in your infinite eq2 knowledge when you use a snap that increases your hate position, it is only going to last until the dps in the 2nd position whacks the mob again. But I can see how as a brawler you aren't used to being #1 on the threat list and seeing how the game works. Thanks for dropping by the guard boards and putting your 2 squirts in.</blockquote>Oh... and<a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=60&topic_id=456274#5165637" target="_blank">"Brawler stances really shouldn't have any penalties of any sort."</a>LOL

EverRude

11-24-2009, 09:41 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite>Snap aggro would not hold aggro off your assassin as you were saying your guardian groupmate was doing He could pull aggro from you for a second but unless you had barely gotten it, by being stupid, you are gonna get it right back. Snap are life saves. They do not generate hate (most of them) and only move the tank up the hatelist. The tank still has to have the hate generation to stay there. The snaps won't help him there. We're simply pointing out it takes more than learning to use taunts (or using snaps) to tank as a guardian or any other tank.It works fine if the DPS class is not being an idiot. No it doesn't "work fine." Snaps grab the mobs attention. That's it. That's all. They are not going to keep the tank from losing it again immediately. That takes DPS and alot of careful skill management. An yeah it helps if the DPS aren't stupid. That said a 10k wizard should be allowed to be a 10k wizard not drop himself down to 6k so the guard can hold aggro.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite>I fixed the quote for you. Would hate for you to take Antan's comments out of context Atan said he would add a hate tranfer to the multitarget moderate. Which would would make it even more powerful. You say that would be much better. Kudos to you for making my suggestion even more powerful and more like a group amends. Though temporaily, as Atan suggests.Why do you think I only quoted that one part? Because I was only agreeing with adding hate transfer to moderate as it is now. You quoted that one part without even acknowledging the first part. Had you atleast said that you disaggreed with the first part it would not have appeared you were manipulating Atan's post. As it was it appeared to be a direct quote with not evidence of alteration.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite>And yes Amends not only lowers the targets hate by a good perentage it, gives that same percentage hate gain to the tank (Paladin) (tho I am not a paladin so I do not know the exact numbers at cap so it may not be quite as OP as I state here which is why I typically leave Pallies out of these discussions). If they target the highest dps they automatically generate more hate that the highest DPS and by default are generating more hate than every other dps in the group. Moderate simply lowers the target's hate. It does not boost the Guards hate in any way. It is [Removed for Content] compared to amends and would be [Removed for Content] compared to amends even in multitarget form.It does not automatically make them the highest hate generator. It only transfers part of the targets hate to the paladin. As it is moderate is [Removed for Content] compared to amends but group moderate would be significantly better than amends. Not only would it decrease everyone elses hate generation but it would also gives a avoidance buff to every group member.Well if the group moderation worked as well as you seem to think it will, automatically making the guard the target and only target, who cares what avoidance buff there was, noone else would get hit.Amends does in fact make the pally the highest hate in the group.</blockquote>The highest amends transfers 41% hate (Level 49 Master 1) from the the dps class to the paladin. Let's do some math. Let's use my hypothetical 10k wizard and 5k tank for example. With amends 41% of his hate is transferred to the paladin. The wizard is now only being credited for doing 5900 dps. The paladin is being credited as doing 9100 dps. The pally wins by a huge margin without using a single taunt. Now ofcourse the Pally puts Amends on the highest dps. So as long as the rest of the group is doing 9k or below the pally almost gets away with almost never doing anything but keeping his dps up and positioning mobs correctly. But ofcourse he does have taunts, snaps, and other hate generating skills. That's ezmode aggro. Assuming I am correct and "transfers hate" means what I think it means when I read the spell.Ofcourse the Wizard could be 20k and the pally still only 5k. That's 8200 dps from the wizard to the pally. Hmmm... let's see. Wizard is now at 11800 dps and the pally is at 13200. Yep pally still wins by a good margin and now the rest of the group can be 12s wizards too and still be fine.Now let's do that math with Guardian and Moderate. Guardian has Master 1 level 63 moderate it's a 46% hate reduction to target. So 10k wizard is credited for doing 5400dps. But the Guard is still only getting 5k dps credit. Thus the wizard still wins if the guard isn't on the ball with his skills and trying to keep his dps at 5k. But wait there's more... the 9k group members are still ripping aggro left and right.Now let's try that 20 wizard with my 5k guardian and moderate. Yuck. Wizard is now doing 10800 dps and the poor guard is still only doing 5k. Ouch. Oh and the rest of the groups is still ripping aggro right along side the wizard.Now let's be fair. Let do the group moderate version for fun. The 10k wiz and the 9k dps classes are all reduced to 5.4k and 4.8k dps respectively. Right in range with our 5k dual weilding heroic guardian. So provided the guard pays attention isn't stunned or cursed much it won't be a problem. Oh but see...they do get stunned alot and cursed and stifled. The's effects don't always hit the whole group and are often on just the tank. So the guard dps will drop. Often. More often that the group members. So they will occasionaly rip aggro even when the guard does everything right.Oh and the 20k wizard and 12k dps in the group. That wizard i still doing nearly 11k damage and the 12k dps are still getting off 6800 dps. Yeah. The guard is still only doing 5k dps. He still looses but a huge margin even with group moderate. This is why most of my guard brethen would say group moderate is still not enough. I argue that it is for a heroic group where 10k dps classes is far more normal than 20k or even 12k.A 5k heroic guard is pretty good too. Most are around 3.5k or so. Oh and please keep in mind most heroic guards are dual weilding and in offensive to do this. They have less survivability in this scenario than an equally equipped SK. Don't even try and say I'm wrong cause I have both those classes equally equipped. The SK beats the Guard in surviability if the guard is dual weilding OR in offensive much less both.So even with this hypothetical scenario you can see the group Moderate would not be as overpowered as Amends is and Amends in game already. Also keep in mind the Guard still won't have the AE skills the pally, SK or Zerker have. So in heavy AE content he's still sucking even with group moderate. I am not trying to talk down on Pallies. Think they're great and probably my next tank. But Guardians cannot compete with them or SK's for aggro. We're balanced well with our brothers the Zerks. They're sucking compared to crusaders too but they can generate more dps (hate) and have more AE skills so TSO hasn't been quite as painful for them.Maybe this could potentially clear some of the confusion for ya. And why I say group moderate is nothing compared to amends.

Yimway

11-24-2009, 09:56 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>. That's ezmode aggro. Assuming I am correct and "transfers hate" means what I think it means when I read the spell.</blockquote>Yes, its a 41% hate transfer, or technically in this case a syphon. It stacks with the 3% the wizard would be giving him in your example as well. Making the paladin take 44% of the wizard's aggro, meaning the paladin only needs to dps/taunt a total of 7% of the wizards output.So a paladin autoattacking with a rusty weapon for ~700 dps will hold aggro off a wizard doing ~10k.Its unbelievable easymode, and honestly, I would expect it to be gone come expansion, so its not a good basis for making any arguement about other fighter's hate controls.I would not be surprised at all if amends became a group moderate.Oh btw, moderate is only 36% M1.

EverRude

11-24-2009, 10:06 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>. That's ezmode aggro. Assuming I am correct and "transfers hate" means what I think it means when I read the spell.</blockquote>Yes, its a 41% hate transfer, or technically in this case a syphon. It stacks with the 3% the wizard would be giving him in your example as well. Making the paladin take 44% of the wizard's aggro, meaning the paladin only needs to dps/taunt a total of 7% of the wizards output.So a paladin autoattacking with a rusty weapon for ~700 dps will hold aggro off a wizard doing ~10k.Its unbelievable easymode, and honestly, I would expect it to be gone come expansion, so its not a good basis for making any arguement about other fighter's hate controls.I would not be surprised at all if amends became a group moderate.Oh btw, moderate is only 36% M1.</blockquote>I'm only using it as an example because Lethe stated that group moderate would be akin to group amends. I just wanted to explain in detail why he is wrong by a large margin. I never would have made any real comparison to amends otherwise.But I feel my explaination did show the difference between the idea of group moderate and the realities. A truly high dps group >10k would still be a challenge for a guard without other hate transfers. But for your average heroic PuG it would allow the guard to do his job provided he has any skills. It most certainly is not ezmode or OP in your average PuG.Oh you're forgetting the Enhance: Moderate AA 10% increase to hate reduction from the Guardian tree. 46%.

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 10:19 PM

Yea, was gonna say moderate is 36% unless you put AA in it, which most guards don't. eq2wikia says 38% but I just logged in and looked and eq2wikia is wrong.Also, in your scenario with guardians you don't consider hate transfers and mods. Even the debuff portion of our CA's generate hate. If you are in a group with a wizard capable of 4 times the guard's dps, most likely the group has a troub running hate song. Most likely the group has an illy. Maybe the group has a swash or assassin feeding hate, but it is highly unlikely you will have a group with guard, coercer, dirge, swash/assassin, healer and a wizard pushing 4x the dps of the guard. So if a wizard is capable of that much dps in comparison to the guard, either the guard is way under-geared/sucks, or the guard is not getting the full holy trinity of hate & dps buffs from coercer/dirge/swash, because the wizard will have to have some mage buffs.But, if you have a guard, priest, illy, troub, wizard, warlock... you mod the lock and realize the group is going to be a pain in the balls. A crusader could thrive in a mage or melee group. A guard (and to a lesser extent zerker) really needs a good ole fashioned single target melee group.Guard, templar, dirge, coercer, assassin, brigand 4tw. Sadly this is not even ideal as assassins having high self buffed dps mod so a coercer doesn't do much for them. However an illy would be worse for the guard, but better for the sin & brig. And it sucks when you have to waste battlecry on the tank instead of a high dps class. If you could get away with replacing the coercer with an illy, and keep IA & BC on the sin & brig, and the guard able to tank in dstance sword & board.... now that would be something.I'm really just starting to think guards should hold aggro with pure threat in dstance (like threat apended to all combat arts, and nerfing melee crit or something), and ostance should be slightly more penalizing defensively to compensate. Instead of just being a taunt bot in dstance you would still have you use your combat arts to hold aggro. And of course threat crit and agression scaling taunts similar to how str scales damage.

EverRude

11-24-2009, 10:33 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yea, was gonna say moderate is 36% unless you put AA in it, which most guards don't. eq2wikia says 38% but I just logged in and looked and eq2wikia is wrong.Also, in your scenario with guardians you don't consider hate transfers and mods. Even the debuff portion of our CA's generate hate. If you are in a group with a wizard capable of 4 times the guard's dps, most likely the group has a troub running hate song. Most likely the group has an illy. Maybe the group has a swash or assassin feeding hate, but it is highly unlikely you will have a group with guard, coercer, dirge, swash/assassin, healer and a wizard pushing 4x the dps of the guard. So if a wizard is capable of that much dps in comparison to the guard, either the guard is way under-geared/sucks, or the guard is not getting the full holy trinity of hate & dps buffs from coercer/dirge/swash, because the wizard will have to have some mage buffs.But, if you have a guard, priest, illy, troub, wizard, warlock... you mod the lock and realize the group is going to be a pain in the balls. A crusader could thrive in a mage or melee group. A guard (and to a lesser extent zerker) really needs a good ole fashioned single target melee group.Guard, templar, dirge, coercer, assassin, brigand 4tw. Sadly this is not even ideal as assassins having high self buffed dps mod so a coercer doesn't do much for them. However an illy would be worse for the guard, but better for the sin & brig. And it sucks when you have to waste battlecry on the tank instead of a high dps class. If you could get away with replacing the coercer with an illy, and keep IA & BC on the sin & brig, and the guard able to tank in dstance sword & board.... now that would be something.</blockquote>The 4x the guard dps is an extreme and I only posted that as a show of just how powerful the pally amends is compared to a group moderate. The 10k wizard is by no means an extreme and fairly common in PuG without need for group stacking.And it's flexibility I am after. I want my guard to be able to pickup 5 other groups members and play. Ok fine some of them may have some transfer or debuffs that will help me but often those are not enough unless I carefully craft the group. Crusaders have that flexibilty. So while I may manage to get a few people to join unless I get the hate transfers right off those recruits are liable to move on rather than wait for me to manage to build myself the perfect group.Group moderate simply offers flexibilty. It does not OP the guard compared to the others plate tanks. Again it gives the guard a fighting chance to compete for the tank spot with groups going to zones the guard had the skills for.

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 10:40 PM

I think guards could have the 2 PBAoEs recast reduced by half (not counting anchor/plant or whatever it's called now). They are pretty weak and are mostly good for getting the first strike on a group of mobs or processing reinforcement. It would help aoe threat control without making it easy-mode by any means, or turning us into an AoE tank... and it would make us somewhat viable for off tanking waves of adds, which currently any plate fighter can do with ease except a guard. It would still be challenging to OT and guard wouldn't be the premiere choice, but it would be feasible. Right now the recasts are so long on our 2 aoes, if you have adds spawning every 45 seconds, you are pretty much [Removed for Content].

EverRude

11-24-2009, 10:40 PM

Oh and I do consider the hate transfers and mods from other classes in the group. But since the other tanks benefit from the same transfers and mods I feel it evens out in the wash.

EverRude

11-24-2009, 10:56 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>I think guards could have the 2 PBAoEs recast reduced by half (not counting anchor/plant or whatever it's called now). They are pretty weak and are mostly good for getting the first strike on a group of mobs or processing reinforcement. It would help aoe threat control without making it easy-mode by any means, or turning us into an AoE tank... and it would make us somewhat viable for off tanking waves of adds, which currently any plate fighter can do with ease except a guard. It would still be challenging to OT and guard wouldn't be the premiere choice, but it would be feasible. Right now the recasts are so long on our 2 aoes, if you have adds spawning every 45 seconds, you are pretty much [Removed for Content].</blockquote>Yeah I know you and most guards feel AE tweaking is the way to go. I agree with you to some extent. But let me ask you this.If we did get the reduced cast on the AE will it help a heroic guard doing 5k in a group with dps classes ranging 7 to 10k dps? Could he did it efficiently without hate transfer classes?I don't believe so.I think we're talking two different topics. AE aggro and the huge taunt vs. dps gap are separate issues.I am tired of having to [Removed for Content] my guard's surviability to a point below my SK's survivabilty and still not hold aggro like the SK can. I stack my AA to try and maximize dps forgoing alot of survival buffs in favor of more minor dps tweaks. And I still can't close the gap between my guard and high dps classes. Yeah sure when some skills are up like reinforcement I can rock on single target stuff and even some single encounter stuff. But that's only IF those skills are up. Do I wait for them between pulls. How reasonable is that for the PuG? Besides once those skills are down that 10k dps is still gonna rip.My thread and my suggestion for group/multitarget moderate are to help close the taunt vs. dps gap.More AE dps or threat does not help close that gap unless it truly OP>

Rahatmattata

11-24-2009, 11:17 PM

Yea, that was a bit of a de-rail. I would like to be able to tank in dstance with a shield in just about any content with a half decent group, like maybe just a scout transfer, or just a dirge... with players that are pretty decent at eq2 and have basic common sense. But, if guards could do that, think of how easy-mode aggro would be with a proper group set up. I honestly don't have much problems aoe or not, if I have a coercer and dirge with similar geared players, but I don't tank groups in dstance, and I don't raid with 3 healers. I guess as far as a moderate enhancement goes, it would be pretty decent.But that wouldn't exactly balance fighters either. Guards should still be able to OT as well as a crusader/zerker can MT. So, pretty much nerf their survivablity or boost our aoe dps... pick one. And guard survivability advantage is only true if he is able to tank in dstance with sword & board, and in a raid with 3 healers. But that's not what this thread is about so whatever, my bad.

therodge

11-25-2009, 01:23 AM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>. That's ezmode aggro. Assuming I am correct and "transfers hate" means what I think it means when I read the spell.</blockquote>Yes, its a 41% hate transfer, or technically in this case a syphon. It stacks with the 3% the wizard would be giving him in your example as well. Making the paladin take 44% of the wizard's aggro, meaning the paladin only needs to dps/taunt a total of 7% of the wizards output.So a paladin autoattacking with a rusty weapon for ~700 dps will hold aggro off a wizard doing ~10k.Its unbelievable easymode, and honestly, I would expect it to be gone come expansion, so its not a good basis for making any arguement about other fighter's hate controls.I would not be surprised at all if amends became a group moderate.Oh btw, moderate is only 36% M1.</blockquote>acually two seprate hate transfers from the same class dont stack, and max at 50%. so if a wizard paladin swash for instance if paladin puts it on the wizard the paladin can get the swashies hate but the wizards will be overtaken, and vice versa also the highest hate transfer wins out over the lower one.that said you got my vote for changing amends then maybe people will stop whining about ezmode paladins

EverRude

11-25-2009, 07:27 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>....if guards could do that, think of how easy-mode aggro would be with a proper group set up....</blockquote>See that makes group moderate sound bad for no reason. You stack the "proper group" with any tank and it gets alot easier. Stack that SK's group with a proper group and he barely has to DPS to hold aggro. Guardian still have to be able to do some real damage. The difference is they don't need the perfect group. We do. I am only asking for what crusaders already have. Flexibilty in group makeup.It still leaves them king's of AE. Still leaves them with higher dps and matching if not better survivability. Still leaves them solo god's compared to guards. And no real effect on raiding. It only gives guard the same flexibility crusaders already have for heroic groups.

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 08:22 AM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh... and<a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=60&topic_id=456274#5165637" target="_blank">"Brawler stances really shouldn't have any penalties of any sort."</a>LOL</blockquote>What? Thats perfectly fair and makes sense unless you want to make it so plate tanks can only use a shield while in defensive stance.

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 08:26 AM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm only using it as an example because Lethe stated that group moderate would be akin to group amends. I just wanted to explain in detail why he is wrong by a large margin. I never would have made any real comparison to amends otherwise.</blockquote>I never said that but now that I look back at my posts I see what probably caused the misunderstanding. I accidently qwrote group amends where I meant to write group moderate.

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 08:31 AM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yea, was gonna say moderate is 36% unless you put AA in it, which most guards don't. eq2wikia says 38% but I just logged in and looked and eq2wikia is wrong.Also, in your scenario with guardians you don't consider hate transfers and mods. Even the debuff portion of our CA's generate hate. If you are in a group with a wizard capable of 4 times the guard's dps, most likely the group has a troub running hate song. Most likely the group has an illy. Maybe the group has a swash or assassin feeding hate, but it is highly unlikely you will have a group with guard, coercer, dirge, swash/assassin, healer and a wizard pushing 4x the dps of the guard. So if a wizard is capable of that much dps in comparison to the guard, either the guard is way under-geared/sucks, or the guard is not getting the full holy trinity of hate & dps buffs from coercer/dirge/swash, because the wizard will have to have some mage buffs.But, if you have a guard, priest, illy, troub, wizard, warlock... you mod the lock and realize the group is going to be a pain in the balls. A crusader could thrive in a mage or melee group. A guard (and to a lesser extent zerker) really needs a good ole fashioned single target melee group.Guard, templar, dirge, coercer, assassin, brigand 4tw. Sadly this is not even ideal as assassins having high self buffed dps mod so a coercer doesn't do much for them. However an illy would be worse for the guard, but better for the sin & brig. And it sucks when you have to waste battlecry on the tank instead of a high dps class. If you could get away with replacing the coercer with an illy, and keep IA & BC on the sin & brig, and the guard able to tank in dstance sword & board.... now that would be something.</blockquote>The 4x the guard dps is an extreme and I only posted that as a show of just how powerful the pally amends is compared to a group moderate. The 10k wizard is by no means an extreme and fairly common in PuG without need for group stacking.And it's flexibility I am after. I want my guard to be able to pickup 5 other groups members and play. Ok fine some of them may have some transfer or debuffs that will help me but often those are not enough unless I carefully craft the group. Crusaders have that flexibilty. So while I may manage to get a few people to join unless I get the hate transfers right off those recruits are liable to move on rather than wait for me to manage to build myself the perfect group.Group moderate simply offers flexibilty. It does not OP the guard compared to the others plate tanks. Again it gives the guard a fighting chance to compete for the tank spot with groups going to zones the guard had the skills for.</blockquote>The flexibility you are asking for is just a verty selfish and likely overpowering demand. Other than SKs and paladins no tanks can just take any random group and expect to hold hate without a hitch. Same goes for DPS classes and doing DPS.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 11:08 AM

So if as guard isn't required build a group containing 3 or 4 specfic other classes he's OP? That's selfish. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps. A guard that isn't in a prime hate tranfer group can't hold aggro and cannot tank.

Yimway

11-25-2009, 12:45 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>acually two seprate hate transfers from the same class dont stack, and max at 50%. so if a wizard paladin swash for instance if paladin puts it on the wizard the paladin can get the swashies hate but the wizards will be overtaken, and vice versa also the highest hate transfer wins out over the lower one.that said you got my vote for changing amends then maybe people will stop whining about ezmode paladins</blockquote>I'm pretty sure a siphon and a transfer stack if applied in the correct order. And yes, they cap at 50%.Now, you can have multiple transfers to you and that isn't capped. As in a swash, an assasin, and a wizard can all transfer to you, and they all stack. You simply can't have more than 50% transfered between two distinct players. It gets complext to prove and understand, but I'm quite confident it works in this manner.I'm for making moderate either multi-castable with concentration, or making it a group buff and lowering its effectiveness. Ie, of its a group buff cap it at 25%.That being said, this is NOT the way I would fix the class's aggro issues. I would instead change reactive taunts to work more like mutagenic burst. So that it procs on block or hit and casts hate in AoE. A guard would then spec to lose survivability (get hit more) in exchange for raw hate.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 01:52 PM

Ok at 25% it would do little good for a heroic guard to close taunt vs. Dps aggro gap in your average PuG. It would still require some hate transfer. Having said that, it would add some fexibilty since there's it's far easier to find one group member with hate tranfer than three. So I am not opposed the that idea. I would still want the Enhance: Moderate to work as it does now yet a little less. Boosting the effect 5%.Using the 10k wizard and 5k guard scenario from before, the guard will still loose to the wizard by 2000. Your average heroic guard will need hate transfer to hold that. But not a whole trio of them. It would certainly help.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 03:33 PM

Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time? Sure some classes sacrifice a primary role to be perform a secondary role better. Like a healer speccing themselves to do damage. I can see a tank sacrificing survivability to do damage. It's what we do already. But we're doing it to compensate for a broken taunt system. If we're fixing the system why not fix it so the guardian's one advantage over other doesn't have to be sacrificed. Does the SK have to sacrifice his Life taps or DPS to hold aggro? Nope. Those are the SK main advantages over other tanks. Why should we HAVE to sacrifice our defence advatage to hold aggro? It's a BS double standard guards are being held to.

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 06:05 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>So if as guard isn't required build a group containing 3 or 4 specfic other classes he's OP? That's selfish. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps. A guard that isn't in a prime hate tranfer group can't hold aggro and cannot tank.</blockquote>No you only need 1 of 2 different classes to make it easy to hold aggro. Either a dirge or a coercer. And you can tank without either you just can't tank well. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps but not of dpsing well.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time?</blockquote>Brawlers do much moreso than guardians do. Try tanking in defensive stance on a brawler without a dirge or warden, you can't. Using offensive causes us to loose our "shield" something wd don't have the advantage of doing is using offensive for accuracy without completly loosing all survivability. Berserkers also have to sacrifice survivability for aggro generation sometimes. You're acting like this is some sort of problem that's unique to guards when it is a problem for all non-crusaders.

therodge

11-25-2009, 06:07 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>acually two seprate hate transfers from the same class dont stack, and max at 50%. so if a wizard paladin swash for instance if paladin puts it on the wizard the paladin can get the swashies hate but the wizards will be overtaken, and vice versa also the highest hate transfer wins out over the lower one.that said you got my vote for changing amends then maybe people will stop whining about ezmode paladins</blockquote>I'm pretty sure a siphon and a transfer stack if applied in the correct order. And yes, they cap at 50%.Now, you can have multiple transfers to you and that isn't capped. As in a swash, an assasin, and a wizard can all transfer to you, and they all stack. You simply can't have more than 50% transfered between two distinct players. It gets complext to prove and understand, but I'm quite confident it works in this manner.I'm for making moderate either multi-castable with concentration, or making it a group buff and lowering its effectiveness. Ie, of its a group buff cap it at 25%.That being said, this is NOT the way I would fix the class's aggro issues. I would instead change reactive taunts to work more like mutagenic burst. So that it procs on block or hit and casts hate in AoE. A guard would then spec to lose survivability (get hit more) in exchange for raw hate.</blockquote>the only way to prove it is to sit on ACT screen with eq2 windowed and watch at what dps the player theives agro, which sadly i have acually done, and it caps at 50% per all, so amends on a wizard + a swashie your already capped, any additional like + assassin etc gets tricky after 50% as it seems to splinter (so hate begins to split between the 3 so it might be 32% amends 10% swashie 8% assassin and such) but i cant prove it, this for along time was why paladins claim Amends isnt OPed against any other class when tanking in a raid, simply becuase the MT group will cap any tank regardless of amends or not, now for groups without a perfect setup thats another thing.ps. done posting in this thread as im derailing it and i think this needs further discussion good luck guardians

EverRude

11-25-2009, 06:58 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>So if as guard isn't required build a group containing 3 or 4 specfic other classes he's OP? That's selfish. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps. A guard that isn't in a prime hate tranfer group can't hold aggro and cannot tank.</blockquote>No you only need 1 of 2 different classes to make it easy to hold aggro. Either a dirge or a coercer. And you can tank without either you just can't tank well. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps but not of dpsing well.A dirge gives a 37% hate mod to the guard (grandmaster). Making a 5k guard's aggro 6800 or so. Way below the 10k wizard. The Coercer Enraging Demeanor gives a 15% transfer to the guard (Master 1). If the Coercer were doing 10k the guard would be credited 1500. So now 6500 aggro for the guard. Way below the coercer (now at 8500) and the Wizard at 10k. And the lower the coercer damage this worse the guard mod bonus is. Put both the coercer and the dirge in the group. That 3300 aggro added to guard for a total of 8800. Still under the aggro of the 10k wizard. BUT manageble with alot of effort and never failing to do top dps. Now add a swashbuckler or assassin. Swashbuckler Master 1 Swarthy Disorder 18%. We'll make it easy and say the swashy is also doing 10. That's another 1800 for the guard. Now the guard has a aggro lock with just a little more than 10k aggro. Or the assassin 19% murderous design IV master 1. 1900 aggro for guard for about the same total as the Dirge, Coercer and Swashy if you swapped the swashy for the Assin.Whatever the totals it takes all 3 classes to make it "easy to hold aggro." One will NOT do it. Try looking at some actual numbers before coming to that kind of wrong headed conclusion.And a dps class doing low dps is still a dps class. A tank unable to hold aggro is a joke.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time?</blockquote>Brawlers do much moreso than guardians do. Try tanking in defensive stance on a brawler without a dirge or warden, you can't. Using offensive causes us to loose our "shield" something wd don't have the advantage of doing is using offensive for accuracy without completly loosing all survivability. Berserkers also have to sacrifice survivability for aggro generation sometimes. You're acting like this is some sort of problem that's unique to guards when it is a problem for all non-crusaders.But brawler survivability is NOT THE advatage everyone screams about. Noone is spouting crap on the forums about how awesome the brawler is because he has the most surviveability. You have the most versatility maybe. The most solo dps maybe. I don't know. I don't play one. But survivability is the guardian's forte. It's the ONLY advantage we have on other tank classess. Without it we have nothing to offer a group. We sacrifise survivability to hold aggro and therefor negate our only advantage. Could bring any other plate tank in that case get better survivability, better aggro, better DPS and better AE control. And DPS is what a beserker does. It's the class design. They sacrifice protection for dps (more aggro in this case as well) by class design. BTW I have mentioned before that Zerks were in a simular situation as guards but being build designed for dps and ae content the zerk is better off than guards currrently are.</blockquote>

Grumpy_Warrior_01

11-25-2009, 07:09 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time? Sure some classes sacrifice a primary role to be perform a secondary role better. Like a healer speccing themselves to do damage.I can see a tank sacrificing survivability to do damage. It's what we do already. But we're doing it to compensate for a broken taunt system. If we're fixing the system why not fix it so the guardian's one advantage over other doesn't have to be sacrificed. Does the SK have to sacrifice his Life taps or DPS to hold aggro? Nope. Those are the SK main advantages over other tanks. Why should we HAVE to sacrifice our defence advatage to hold aggro? It's a BS double standard guards are being held to.</blockquote>I think it's become a natural habit to put in some kind of downside to offset suggestions, even when those suggestions are otherwise reasonable on their own. "We should get X but we should accept Y to compensate." We all tend to do it. If the poster is willing to accept a nerf to one thing, then the pre-contemplated tradeoff will present the improvement in a more balanced and defensible light. And the trolls will be less likely to spew their nonsense, rendering the thread dysfunctional.But underpowered is underpowered, and sometimes straight-up improvements to one class, or straight-up nerfs to another class are warranted with no other offsetting adjustments. Why would anyone accept lower durability as a Guardian? We are supposed to be the standard for durability! As a single-purpose class, I also don't accept craptastic aggro control as an appropriate trade-off for anything. Yet with all of our diplomatic speculations that's what we have ended up with. If a player is willing to artificially cripple the DNA of the purest of the tanking classes, then I guess they don't mind shelling out more good money for The Shadowknight Expansion v2.0 in February.EverRude, I like your idea about Moderate going group-wide better than the concentration slot idea, because right now I think most Guardians are running with 4 out of 5 slots filled. So casting Moderate on any more than a single target would force us to drop something we need in order to moderate more players, hence the first two paragraphs above.

Landiin

11-25-2009, 08:35 PM

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 08:53 PM

<cite>Toran@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time? Sure some classes sacrifice a primary role to be perform a secondary role better. Like a healer speccing themselves to do damage. I can see a tank sacrificing survivability to do damage. It's what we do already. But we're doing it to compensate for a broken taunt system. If we're fixing the system why not fix it so the guardian's one advantage over other doesn't have to be sacrificed. Does the SK have to sacrifice his Life taps or DPS to hold aggro? Nope. Those are the SK main advantages over other tanks. Why should we HAVE to sacrifice our defence advatage to hold aggro? It's a BS double standard guards are being held to.</blockquote>I agree 100% we should not sacrifice any of our survivability to hold aggro. DPS should be at the cost of Survivability not aggro.. Every fighter should hold aggro the same, yes every fighter. The balance should come in on DPS,survivability and utility NOT aggro. Losing survivability at the cost of aggro has to be the dumbest thing I've ever herd. Atan I normaly agree with you on most things you say but this one.. man.. I don't understand your logic here..</blockquote>Now that I agree with.

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 09:04 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>So if as guard isn't required build a group containing 3 or 4 specfic other classes he's OP? That's selfish. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps. A guard that isn't in a prime hate tranfer group can't hold aggro and cannot tank.</blockquote>No you only need 1 of 2 different classes to make it easy to hold aggro. Either a dirge or a coercer. And you can tank without either you just can't tank well. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps but not of dpsing well.A dirge gives a 37% hate mod to the guard (grandmaster). Making a 5k guard's aggro 6800 or so. Way below the 10k wizard. The Coercer Enraging Demeanor gives a 15% transfer to the guard (Master 1). If the Coercer were doing 10k the guard would be credited 1500. So now 6500 aggro for the guard. Way below the coercer (now at 8500) and the Wizard at 10k. And the lower the coercer damage this worse the guard mod bonus is. Put both the coercer and the dirge in the group. That 3300 aggro added to guard for a total of 8800. Still under the aggro of the 10k wizard. BUT manageble with alot of effort and never failing to do top dps. Now add a swashbuckler or assassin. Swashbuckler Master 1 Swarthy Disorder 18%. We'll make it easy and say the swashy is also doing 10. That's another 1800 for the guard. Now the guard has a aggro lock with just a little more than 10k aggro. Or the assassin 19% murderous design IV master 1. 1900 aggro for guard for about the same total as the Dirge, Coercer and Swashy if you swapped the swashy for the Assin.Coercer is not just transfer, it's also a hate mod buff. Also, why are you giving DPS amounts for raid equipped players when you are supposedly talking about heroic groups?Whatever the totals it takes all 3 classes to make it "easy to hold aggro." One will NOT do it. Try looking at some actual numbers before coming to that kind of wrong headed conclusion.And a dps class doing low dps is still a dps class. A tank unable to hold aggro is a joke.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time?</blockquote>Brawlers do much moreso than guardians do. Try tanking in defensive stance on a brawler without a dirge or warden, you can't. Using offensive causes us to loose our "shield" something wd don't have the advantage of doing is using offensive for accuracy without completly loosing all survivability. Berserkers also have to sacrifice survivability for aggro generation sometimes. You're acting like this is some sort of problem that's unique to guards when it is a problem for all non-crusaders.But brawler survivability is NOT THE advatage everyone screams about. Noone is spouting crap on the forums about how awesome the brawler is because he has the most surviveability. You have the most versatility maybe. The most solo dps maybe. I don't know. I don't play one. Brawlers do not have any advantage compared to other tank classes other than soloing which does not count for group balance. The point is however that all tanks are supposed to be just that, tanks. Their primary job is to take as little damage as possible while holding hate yet all non-crusaders need to give up surviability in order to better hold aggro.But survivability is the guardian's forte. It's the ONLY advantage we have on other tank classess. Without it we have nothing to offer a group. We sacrifise survivability to hold aggro and therefor negate our only advantage. Could bring any other plate tank in that case get better survivability, better aggro, better DPS and better AE control. That's why guardians need more aggro tools, not an easy button group moderate.And DPS is what a beserker does. It's the class design. They sacrifice protection for dps (more aggro in this case as well) by class design. BTW I have mentioned before that Zerks were in a simular situation as guards but being build designed for dps and ae content the zerk is better off than guards currrently are.Berserkers are probably the only tank that is where they should be in every way, although they still have far more avoidance than they should. Guardians do definatly need more aggro tools, SKs need nerfed survivability and paladins need amends toned down a bit an get some more active hate tools instead. Brawlers need more DPS, especially AoE DPS.</blockquote></blockquote>

Davngr1

11-25-2009, 09:10 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>So if as guard isn't required build a group containing 3 or 4 specfic other classes he's OP? That's selfish. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps. A guard that isn't in a prime hate tranfer group can't hold aggro and cannot tank.</blockquote>No you only need 1 of 2 different classes to make it easy to hold aggro. Either a dirge or a coercer. And you can tank without either you just can't tank well. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps but not of dpsing well. stop making you're self look dumb to everyone that has been playing a guard in TSO please. you have no clue AT all what you're talking about. my necro (a crap class for the most part) can jack agro from guards with out dirge AND coercer UNLESS said guard is geard to the teeth and even then. <cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time?</blockquote>Brawlers do much moreso than guardians do. Try tanking in defensive stance on a brawler without a dirge or warden, you can't. Using offensive causes us to loose our "shield" something wd don't have the advantage of doing is using offensive for accuracy without completly loosing all survivability. Berserkers also have to sacrifice survivability for aggro generation sometimes. You're acting like this is some sort of problem that's unique to guards when it is a problem for all non-crusaders. AGAIN stop making your self look dumb. UNLIKE you i play both a bruiser and a guardian, yes bruisers/brawlers need just as much work as guardians but only an idiot would say that guards are better off then brawlers, why? well for one in raid no one brings a guardian as a 3rd. tank, why? it's stuipid. both are about the same when it comes to heroic content but my bruiser is A LOT funner to tank with and does LOTS more dps. further more you don't even know you're own bruiser class very well sir. IF you did you would know that using a lower level defensive stance (when you need it) along with the 5% accuracy will pretty much void out any hit rate loss. further more like zerks brawlers can use ALL their saves with out using a SHILD unlike guards that NEED the shild to USE 66% of the classes survivability tools. it's funny how someone so CLUELESS is here trying to comment as if he understands anything about current tank balance.</blockquote>

Lethe5683

11-25-2009, 09:35 PM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> stop making you're self look dumb to everyone that has been playing a guard in TSO please. you have no clue AT all what you're talking about. my necro (a crap class for the most part) can jack agro from guards with out dirge AND coercer UNLESS said guard is geard to the teeth and even then. </blockquote>Let me get this straight. You have trouble holding hate against an equally (or worse) geared DPS class even when you have a dirge or coercer?<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> AGAIN stop making your self look dumb. UNLIKE you i play both a bruiser and a guardian, yes bruisers/brawlers need just as much work as guardians but only an idiot would say that guards are better off then brawlers, why? well for one in raid no one brings a guardian as a 3rd. tank, why? it's stuipid. both are about the same when it comes to heroic content but my bruiser is A LOT funner to tank with and does LOTS more dps. </blockquote>Yes, you play both which you have said numerous times already. I never said that I have not played a guardian; I said I don't have a guardian. I have played both, but only play guardian on occasion when helping out guild mates. The guardian I played has no raid gear (not a single piece) and only a fabled epic, yet I can without much difficulty hold hate against any equally geared DPS class I have grouped with and the group has only a dirge for hate mod.In case you haven't noticed bruisers are not in any demand for raids either and while bruisers do better DPS they also have significantly worse survivability.<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> further more you don't even know you're own bruiser class very well sir. IF you did you would know that using a lower level defensive stance (when you need it) along with the 5% accuracy will pretty much void out any hit rate loss. further more like zerks brawlers can use ALL their saves with out using a SHILD unlike guards that NEED the shild to USE 66% of the classes survivability tools. </blockquote>Of course I know that but it's not just the penalties that are the problem. Brawlers have to hit enemies with auto attacks for almost all of their hate generation, In order to hit mobs at any reasonable rate in the tougher TSO zones a BONUS to weapon skill is needed. So even if defensive stance had no penalties at all, without a dirge or warden for the accuracy buff it's still not going to work.Edit: To remove insults, I'm not going to stoop to your level.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 10:11 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>So if as guard isn't required build a group containing 3 or 4 specfic other classes he's OP? That's selfish. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps. A guard that isn't in a prime hate tranfer group can't hold aggro and cannot tank.</blockquote>No you only need 1 of 2 different classes to make it easy to hold aggro. Either a dirge or a coercer. And you can tank without either you just can't tank well. A DPS class that isn't in a prime DPS group is still capable of doing dps but not of dpsing well.A dirge gives a 37% hate mod to the guard (grandmaster). Making a 5k guard's aggro 6800 or so. Way below the 10k wizard. The Coercer Enraging Demeanor gives a 15% transfer to the guard (Master 1). If the Coercer were doing 10k the guard would be credited 1500 and modded 1500. So now 8k aggro for the guard. Below the coercer (now at 8500) and the Wizard at 10k. And the lower the coercer damage this worse the guard mod bonus is. Put both the coercer and the dirge in the group. That 4800 aggro added to guard for a total of 9800. Still under the aggro of the 10k wizard. BUT manageble with effort and never failing to do top dps. Now add a swashbuckler or assassin. Swashbuckler Master 1 Swarthy Disorder 18%. We'll make it easy and say the swashy is also doing 10. That's another 1800 for the guard. Now the guard has a aggro lock with just a little more than 11k aggro. Or the assassin 19% murderous design IV master 1. 1900 aggro for guard for about the same total as the Dirge, Coercer and Swashy if you swapped the swashy for the Assin.Coercer is not just transfer, it's also a hate mod buff. Also, why are you giving DPS amounts for raid equipped players when you are supposedly talking about heroic groups?I get you on the hate buff. Wasn't sure about the double effect. Adjusted the math btw. Try actually reading it this time and maybe respond to my second point. It will take more than 1 class the make it "easy to hold aggro." If fact easy doesn't happen till you have atleast a dirge AND a coercer AND the guardian never fails to do maximum dps while sacrifising defence doing it. Less defence means more stuns and stifles and such therefor less dps. Raid eqipped players? Where did I say that? And if you're talking about the hypothetical dps I gave the swash and coercer that was just to make the math easier. The fact is though, with them putting out less dps they transfer less hate. And therefor the guard benefits less.Whatever the totals it takes all 3 classes to make it truly "easy to hold aggro." One will NOT do it. Try looking at some actual numbers before coming to that kind of wrong headed conclusion.And a dps class doing low dps is still a dps class. A tank unable to hold aggro is a joke.<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time?</blockquote>Brawlers do much moreso than guardians do. Try tanking in defensive stance on a brawler without a dirge or warden, you can't. Using offensive causes us to loose our "shield" something wd don't have the advantage of doing is using offensive for accuracy without completly loosing all survivability. Berserkers also have to sacrifice survivability for aggro generation sometimes. You're acting like this is some sort of problem that's unique to guards when it is a problem for all non-crusaders.But brawler survivability is NOT THE advatage everyone screams about. Noone is spouting crap on the forums about how awesome the brawler is because he has the most surviveability. You have the most versatility maybe. The most solo dps maybe. I don't know. I don't play one. Brawlers do not have any advantage compared to other tank classes other than soloing which does not count for group balance. The point is however that all tanks are supposed to be just that, tanks. Their primary job is to take as little damage as possible while holding hate yet all non-crusaders need to give up surviability in order to better hold aggro. And again my point is the guardian is sacrifising defence and still not able to hold aggro without atleast 2 of the hate mod/transfer classes in the group with any reliability. With 3 it fairly easy unless you'er raiding. If I could sacrifise defence and hold aggro OR get some hate mod/transfer and keep my defence it wouldn't be as bad. But guards have to do both!But survivability is the guardian's forte. It's the ONLY advantage we have on other tank classess. Without it we have nothing to offer a group. We sacrifise survivability to hold aggro and therefor negate our only advantage. Could bring any other plate tank in that case get better survivability, better aggro, better DPS and better AE control. That's why guardians need more aggro tools, not an easy button group moderate.I have already shown you the numbers. Put a guard with my full version of group moderate in a group with multiple 10k dps he will still struggle. Make is less than 10k and he should make it IF he can keep his dps up. More than 10k dps is a fail. And DPS is what a beserker does. It's the class design. They sacrifice protection for dps (more aggro in this case as well) by class design. BTW I have mentioned before that Zerks were in a simular situation as guards but being build designed for dps and ae content the zerk is better off than guards currrently are.Berserkers are probably the only tank that is where they should be in every way, although they still have far more avoidance than they should. Guardians do definatly need more aggro tools, SKs need nerfed survivability and paladins need amends toned down a bit an get some more active hate tools instead. Brawlers need more DPS, especially AoE DPS.Please feel free to start a thread proposing the nerfs you want to do to other classes not derail my thread with unecessary threats to them. It doesn't address the topic of group moderate when you do that. It only shows your desire to bring other tanks down.And the only piece of useful information you have actually given during this responce was, you think guards could use more aggro tools. Something active. You're most definitely against passive. Gotcha. We can debate that. I can work that in somehow to work for both of us if you'll stop derailing the thread and ignoring evidence that refutes you claims about how easy guards can hold aggro.</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>

Rahatmattata

11-25-2009, 10:33 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Let me get this straight. You have trouble holding hate against an equally (or worse) geared DPS class even when you have a dirge or coercer?</blockquote>Yes. An average geared guardian in a group with players with a similar gear level will consistantly lose aggro to dps with only a coercer or a dirge, unless he duel wields in offensive stance, which means he can't do zones where mobs hit him hard. Even then rips will happen, but snaps should keep things pretty chill.Unless your dps happens to be a swash and assassin.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 10:35 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> stop making you're self look dumb to everyone that has been playing a guard in TSO please. you have no clue AT all what you're talking about. my necro (a crap class for the most part) can jack agro from guards with out dirge AND coercer UNLESS said guard is geard to the teeth and even then. </blockquote>Let me get this straight. You have trouble holding hate against an equally (or worse) geared DPS class even when you have a dirge or coercer? First he said his necro was ripping aggro. Not that he was the guard. Second a well geared necro can put out some dang good dps of a special variety that seems to generate extra hate. Third the life burn crap they do will rip aggro nearly everytime they hit red. It's an AI thing. And as far as equally geared goes. The dps classes gear allows them to scale way past what any guard can put together. The best raid guards would struggle with a equally raid geared dps without 2 hate classes in his group. Please try to read what a post actually says before responding with crap.<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> AGAIN stop making your self look dumb. UNLIKE you i play both a bruiser and a guardian, yes bruisers/brawlers need just as much work as guardians but only an idiot would say that guards are better off then brawlers, why? well for one in raid no one brings a guardian as a 3rd. tank, why? it's stuipid. both are about the same when it comes to heroic content but my bruiser is A LOT funner to tank with and does LOTS more dps. </blockquote>Yes, you play both which you have said numerous times already. I never said that I have not played a guardian; I said I don't have a guardian. I have played both, but only play guardian on occasion when helping out guild mates. The guardian I played has no raid gear (not a single piece) and only a fabled epic, yet I can without much difficulty hold hate against any equally geared DPS class I have grouped with and the group has only a dirge for hate mod.I asked you point blank if you played a guard and you said you played a brawler for a few years. Why not mention the guardian experience then? It would have helped your argument then far more than now. And yes even my guard can handle most equally equipped dps with just a dirge. Trouble is not all dps is equal even with equal equipment. I can handle a myth wizard if he sucks and not a fabled wizard if he's dang good, if I have a dirge in the group. Trouble with PuG's is, you never know what your gonna get, unless you know every player. EQ2 hasn't gotten that small yet.In case you haven't noticed bruisers are not in any demand for raids either and while bruisers do better DPS they also have significantly worse survivability.<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> further more you don't even know you're own bruiser class very well sir. IF you did you would know that using a lower level defensive stance (when you need it) along with the 5% accuracy will pretty much void out any hit rate loss. further more like zerks brawlers can use ALL their saves with out using a SHILD unlike guards that NEED the shild to USE 66% of the classes survivability tools. </blockquote>Of course I know that but it's not just the penalties that are the problem. Brawlers have to hit enemies with auto attacks for almost all of their hate generation, In order to hit mobs at any reasonable rate in the tougher TSO zones a BONUS to weapon skill is needed. So even if defensive stance had no penalties at all, without a dirge or warden for the accuracy buff it's still not going to work.Edit: To remove insults, I'm not going to stoop to your level.</blockquote>

Rahatmattata

11-25-2009, 10:39 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh... and<a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=60&topic_id=456274#5165637" target="_blank">"Brawler stances really shouldn't have any penalties of any sort."</a>LOL</blockquote>What? Thats perfectly fair and makes sense unless you want to make it so plate tanks can only use a shield while in defensive stance.</blockquote>Instead of going into this whole thing explaining why your an idiot for thinking stances shouldn't have any penalties attatched, and the fact many guards already have to tank in ostance dw anyway... I'll just sit back and enjoy watching you make a fool of yourself all over again. If anyone gets really super bored at work, check out some of his ridiculous posts from the RoK era.

Rahatmattata

11-25-2009, 10:54 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>The best raid guards would struggle with a equally raid geared dps without 2 hate classes in his group. Please try to read what a post actually says before responding with crap.</blockquote>And that's with troub de-aggro in the mage group. Which, IMO is how it should be... I think guards are pretty solid with hate except a little bump in aoe aggro. Hate control should be a part of the game and dps should not be able to max burn 100% of the time. Dispatch, concealment chain, warlock disease bombs, should all be burst dps timed with a fighter temp threat buff, or dps rips and dies. Crusaders have entirely too much threat control making deaggros and group saves obsolete, and way too much survivability for having that kind of threat control. This is why I much prefer the temp boosts to things like sentry watch, group mit buff, unyielding will, etc. That is a more well-rounded and robust set of things to boost, as aggro is pretty good where it is with a guard. Honestly, crusaders are just way OP.I'd say this thread is fully de-railed now.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 11:03 PM

Guys please try to keep things civil. I certainly understand the frustrations y'all feel. But this thread is doing ok as far as I'm concerned. We've made some progress I think.Atan proposes a change to my plan. Multitarget at full Moderate strength using concentration. A guard would have to sacrifise some dang good buffs to do more than 2 moderates but that is aceeptable for those occasions a heroic guard is in a tough group. I'm good with this one. It fairly powerful and flexible. Guard only needs to moderate the trouble makers in the group. It would allows a guard to be very flexible with group invites for heroic PuG without having to stress about who may or may not have hate mods or too high dps.OrAtan also proposed a full group moderate at only 25%. I'm good with this one as well. It allows for my number 1 goal to makes guard more flexible. In a lower dps group this version of moderate would be good alone if the guard is dps'ng aggresively. In a high dps group the guard will need another hate class to help him cover the difference. But that is better than 2 or 3 hate classes as is now required. It would also allow a guard to build a group he could be defensive in. Provided there is some AA skill to enchance that moderate further.Which leads to Lethe...Lethe would rather any changes made to Moderate were not passive but require active use. I''m ok with this one as well. But only if it is part of the overall passive moderate change.Such as... a group wide 20% moderate with an AA skill that could be activated to spike the Moderate for 5% for every point spent for a total of 25%. It would total a 45% hate reduction to the group for a 2 minute or so duration. Reuse 5 min maybe? This will allow the guard to dps on trash to hold aggro, but if it gets loose, it's trash anyways so not too bad. But for big named that hit hard the guard can go full defensive and spike his Moderate to scale up alot more to allow him to hold aggro better while putting out crap dps.We can continue to play with the numbers but this is where I'm at.I know some of you made some other tweaks but I can't recall and it's gotten harder to sort out what has been said in the previous rants. I apologize if I missed something I should have mentioned so feel free to bring it to my attention.I still want to avoid adding AE. That is a different subject. Please let's not derail.My wild and quite unlikely hope is that perhaps the supposedly new class dev may actually stop by here and read this. Maybe just maybe if he doesn't have to wade through too much bickering about crap that doesn't even belong in this discussion he'll get some idea even if they're not what we'd want.So again. Please keep it more civil.

EverRude

11-25-2009, 11:30 PM

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>The best raid guards would struggle with a equally raid geared dps without 2 hate classes in his group. Please try to read what a post actually says before responding with crap.</blockquote>And that's with troub de-aggro in the mage group. Which, IMO is how it should be... I think guards are pretty solid with hate except a little bump in aoe aggro. Hate control should be a part of the game and dps should not be able to max burn 100% of the time. Dispatch, concealment chain, warlock disease bombs, should all be burst dps timed with a fighter temp threat buff, or dps rips and dies. Crusaders have entirely too much threat control making deaggros and group saves obsolete, and way too much survivability for having that kind of threat control. This is why I much prefer the temp boosts to things like sentry watch, group mit buff, unyielding will, etc. That is a more well-rounded and robust set of things to boost, as aggro is pretty good where it is with a guard. Honestly, crusaders are just way OP.I'd say this thread is fully de-railed now.</blockquote>It's not derailed. Just sidetracked a bit.And I agree with you about dps going 100% full burn and crusaders being OP. But crying for nerfs and telling dps they have to L2P will get nothing accomplished but more angry rants.So we either avoid those topics and focus on changing guard to fit today's game or we rant and start flame wars. I prefer the former. Even if the latter would feel more satisfying. Although both tactics ultimately accomlish nothing unless some dev is willing to listen.

schizolic

11-27-2009, 11:54 PM

make it group wide for 1 conc slot, change the chance to avoid to a chance to intercede, balancing it in the way that the guard gets the unmitted damage from aoe's and such.

Vlahkmaak

11-28-2009, 05:40 PM

Group wide moderate will not fix the issue. The issue is a function of damage out put of the guardian compared to damage output of the DPS class both in single target and blue aoe dps/threat generation. In places like Guk3 where you have multiple encounters of linked adds a grp moderate is not going to assist the guardian in picing up and holding aggro on the multiple linked encounters. The guardian MUST ahve a proper set up to be successful in that zone and DPs that understands how to assist an MA so the guard can be target switching to control the waves. A crusader does not suffer the same level of work. Brigands for instance have no hate transfer and can do serious dps - my pally can amend this and suck up alot of threat - the guard can merely moderate it if running a less than optimum pug or sit the grp out and wait for a dirge, coercer and/or swashie. Like it or not the game has turned into an AOE game and guards need a large blue AOE threat component tied to hold the line and both of our Blue AOEs (provided you are agi spec'd which seems a must for most content these days like STA was back in KoS/EoF). Moderate is just not as useful as amends/sacrament/DM and the 7-8 AOEs my pally sports, add holy ground with full AA's and its like have re-inforcement up non stop. Aggro goes no where but me. SKs are even more sic. Add to that SKs can pull aggro ZW in PVP vs pvp targets on the other side of the zone and you see how borked crusader aggro generation is.

Davngr1

11-29-2009, 02:48 AM

<cite>Trisscuit@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> stop making you're self look dumb to everyone that has been playing a guard in TSO please. you have no clue AT all what you're talking about. my necro (a crap class for the most part) can jack agro from guards with out dirge AND coercer UNLESS said guard is geard to the teeth and even then. </blockquote>Let me get this straight. You have trouble holding hate against an equally (or worse) geared DPS class even when you have a dirge or coercer?like it was posted prior, yes guard has a hard time generation enough agression against players with the same level gear. guard has better aoe agro then bruiser since you can spec for *true* aoe attack, maybe that's what is giving you the false impression that guards are in any way shape or form better off the brawlers. exp. i box a dps class and my guard and my friends boxes one of her healers and a dirge, the dirge auto attacks only and so does my guard for the most part with moderate on my other dps class toon.. my guard looses agro to the dirge auto attack if i dont DW...<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> AGAIN stop making your self look dumb. UNLIKE you i play both a bruiser and a guardian, yes bruisers/brawlers need just as much work as guardians but only an idiot would say that guards are better off then brawlers, why? well for one in raid no one brings a guardian as a 3rd. tank, why? it's stuipid. both are about the same when it comes to heroic content but my bruiser is A LOT funner to tank with and does LOTS more dps. </blockquote>Yes, you play both which you have said numerous times already. I never said that I have not played a guardian; I said I don't have a guardian. I have played both, but only play guardian on occasion when helping out guild mates. The guardian I played has no raid gear (not a single piece) and only a fabled epic, yet I can without much difficulty hold hate against any equally geared DPS class I have grouped with and the group has only a dirge for hate mod.In case you haven't noticed bruisers are not in any demand for raids either and while bruisers do better DPS they also have significantly worse survivability. every good raid force has a brawler their accuracy buff is awsome and their the best candidate for 3rd/4th tank.. anyone that puts a guard in this spot is not going to kill anything worth killing. dont get me wrong we do agree that brawler are in need of a few fixes but for you to come here and comment on a class you know nothing about is.. well.. <cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote> further more you don't even know you're own bruiser class very well sir. IF you did you would know that using a lower level defensive stance (when you need it) along with the 5% accuracy will pretty much void out any hit rate loss. further more like zerks brawlers can use ALL their saves with out using a SHILD unlike guards that NEED the shild to USE 66% of the classes survivability tools. </blockquote>Of course I know that but it's not just the penalties that are the problem. Brawlers have to hit enemies with auto attacks for almost all of their hate generation, In order to hit mobs at any reasonable rate in the tougher TSO zones a BONUS to weapon skill is needed. So even if defensive stance had no penalties at all, without a dirge or warden for the accuracy buff it's still not going to work. yes brawlers need to be defined as a class but again.. it has nothing to do with guard issues. Edit: To remove insults, I'm not going to stoop to your level. i appologice if you felt insulted, it's just that having people try to talk about a class they don't play or anything about is quite.. well.. you know.. </blockquote>

Yimway

11-30-2009, 01:55 PM

Yimway

11-30-2009, 02:00 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>the only way to prove it is to sit on ACT screen with eq2 windowed and watch at what dps the player theives agro, which sadly i have acually done, and it caps at 50% per all, so amends on a wizard + a swashie your already capped, any additional like + assassin etc gets tricky after 50% as it seems to splinter (so hate begins to split between the 3 so it might be 32% amends 10% swashie 8% assassin and such) but i cant prove it, this for along time was why paladins claim Amends isnt OPed against any other class when tanking in a raid, simply becuase the MT group will cap any tank regardless of amends or not, now for groups without a perfect setup thats another thing.ps. done posting in this thread as im derailing it and i think this needs further discussion good luck guardians</blockquote>LOL.50% of what?Your talking about amends to a wizard taking 40% of his generated threat and stacking on 23% from a swash.They both stack and there isn't a magical 50% cap, cause it would be 50% of what? What aggregate total are you taking 50% of when your dealing with 2 different parties. 50% of their combined hate is the cap? Explain to me how this cap is going to work mathmaticaly.I read your post to suggest this 40% from player A and 23% from player B somehow magicaly caps at 50% of some value (their aggregate?, their average?, or ???)Like I said, I'm quite confident its 50% cap per target pair. You can not transfer more than 50% between two unique targets, but that does not stop you amending a wizard, and still getting transfers from a swash and assasin in group.-----------------What I would like to see is all threat transfers capped at 50% of your personal hate generation. That would be keen, however, that is not how it works.Hate increasers do cap at 50% as you suggested, however transfers are capped at 50% per target pair.

Grumpy_Warrior_01

11-30-2009, 03:46 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>To gain aoe aggro, we should sacrafice survivability.Otherwise, we'd be grossly OP.</blockquote>Let's face it, if you have 6 mobs banging on you instead of one, any tank's survivability is already compromised automatically. I can't understand dropping survivability, a Guardian trademark, at the same time that you are making more enemies stick to you. That's the exact time when you would need durability enhancements, not reductions.What would be wrong with losing DPS to gain AoE aggro instead? That way, if you are tanking you're focusing on holding the enemy's attention and staying alive, while if you are not tanking you have the choice to increase your damage output, bringing at least something useful to the party.The capacity for all fighters to produce hate without outside help should be the same across the board. If you have chosen the tank role for a group, having sufficient threat is a fundamental baseline of that role, and should not be buffed or gimped based upon which fighter class you happen to be. Instead, the relationship between damage output and durability -- i.e. kill the mob faster or stay standing longer -- should be the sliding scale that distinguishes the fighter subclasses. Not hate. The only thing grossly OP is being able to do all three at the same time effortlessly and continuously.

therodge

11-30-2009, 07:35 PM

Atan your confidence is on the line of arrogance, read through (atleast the first three pages)this thread it will explain in detail how amends works alot better then i can, its more complex then it needs to be but i assure you as a paladin as my main for the last 5 years i know how my own spell works, here is a snippit (edited for language) <a href="http://www.eq2flames.com/paladins/33455-amends-[Removed for Content]-means-3.html">http://www.eq2flames.com/paladins/3...tf-means-3.html</a>There's been at least 3 Paladins posting here that knows ****, but people don't get it. Stonestrong tried to dumb it down for some, but I doubt even that'll make much difference.Someone did post and didn't seem to get how normalization works so let me lay it out for those that aren't familiar with the process.Divide 50 (the cap that you are normalizing down to) by the sum of all transfers (for example, 41 + 19 + 17 = 77). Now multiply each transfer by the result (about 0.65, rounded). This will tell you how much each transfer actually contributes after normalization (approximately 26.7%, 12.3%, and 11% respectively). You can see that after normalization, they will add up to 50% (barring any issues with rounding).It's good to know how this works for funky situations, but as Stonestrong has pointed out, you don't necessarily have to know these exact numbers and their exact result to be effective. In the end, if your hate transfers don't suck, and you don't suck, you'll generally be fine.also a post from aerilickYes they stack(swashy + assassin). You can stack hate transfers/siphons but they will cap out at 50%. The same applies to hate gain/reduction which also cap at 50%. Spells cast by the same class obviously won't stack but otherwise they will.Message edited by Aeralik on 07/23/2007 07:35:00. and the OPs post for contextTopic says it all, just curious if anyone knows if you had both assassin and Swashy in the same group and they both put their transfer on the same person if they would both work at full effect?ThanksD

Lethe5683

11-30-2009, 07:42 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also Atan, why must we sacrifice out survivability to hold aggro? Why is this ok? What other tank class, what other class in general has to sacrifice their primary advantage to do their job full time? Sure some classes sacrifice a primary role to be perform a secondary role better. Like a healer speccing themselves to do damage.</blockquote>To gain aoe aggro, we should sacrafice survivability.Otherwise, we'd be grossly OP.</blockquote>I disagree. While I do think that something passive like a group moderate would be OP I still think that guards need some sort of AoE taunt that is not just a snap. They need something to generate some extra hate, even if it's just a temporary thing. I would agree however that if you mean gaining AoE aggro though improved AoE DPS then yes you should defiantly sacrifice survivability for that. Threat is not anywhere near as good as DPS, so adding better hate control would be a good way to improve guards tanking ability without making them OP.

Yimway

11-30-2009, 09:50 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>Divide 50 (the cap that you are normalizing down to) by the sum of all transfers (for example, 41 + 19 + 17 = 77). Now multiply each transfer by the result (about 0.65, rounded). This will tell you how much each transfer actually contributes after normalization (approximately 26.7%, 12.3%, and 11% respectively). You can see that after normalization, they will add up to 50% (barring any issues with rounding).It's good to know how this works for funky situations, but as Stonestrong has pointed out, you don't necessarily have to know these exact numbers and their exact result to be effective. In the end, if your hate transfers don't suck, and you don't suck, you'll generally be fine.</blockquote>41% of what + 19% of what + 17% of what?See the thing is your taking 41% of 8000 hate and say 19% of 6000 hate, and 17% of 4000 hate != 77% hate, cause its 77% of what? Where exactly are you going to cap 50%? Now you could suggest that no more than 50% of the aggregrate total could be transfered as in this case the three dps are totalling 18k hate/s and no more than 9k (50% of aggregrate could be transfered. However, I don't believe any aggregrate calculation exists in this case. You then add in hate proc items, trak shields, and other item affects, and it all gets dodgy.I have actually discussed this in person with Aeralik, so I'm not sure you need to quote his posts, as if you read what he said he never clarified 50% of what.But mostly I agree with the latter part I quoted you on.

Yimway

11-30-2009, 09:58 PM

<cite>Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>To gain aoe aggro, we should sacrafice survivability.Otherwise, we'd be grossly OP.</blockquote>Let's face it, if you have 6 mobs banging on you instead of one, any tank's survivability is already compromised automatically.</blockquote>Actually in practice I disagree. Tanking 6 mobs has rarely been a survivability check, in my experience its an aggro management check. I can room pull a dozen encounters with my SK and burn them all down with no survivabilitiy issue, If I attempt the same on my guardian, I'll typically be the last to die as I've got all the survivability I need but no effective method of keeping the mobs interested in me.Now, if I have the aggro issue solved and I can keep them on me AND I get to keep my significantly higher survivability than my sk, I've just created a grossly OP class. If however, I sacrafice my survivability bonuses and actualy become lesss survivable to gain aoe hate, I feel we're talking about a much more balanced approach.The SK still wins out in AOE dps, he wins out at higher survivability vs aoe encounters, but the guardian is provided a reasonable risk/reward tradeoff to not be useless in aoe encounters.Fact is, if you make a guard able to hold aggro in all scenarios, they become nearly defacto the best tank class, and I would never make such a suggestion as 'balancing' any class.

Davngr1

12-01-2009, 02:37 AM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>Divide 50 (the cap that you are normalizing down to) by the sum of all transfers (for example, 41 + 19 + 17 = 77). Now multiply each transfer by the result (about 0.65, rounded). This will tell you how much each transfer actually contributes after normalization (approximately 26.7%, 12.3%, and 11% respectively). You can see that after normalization, they will add up to 50% (barring any issues with rounding).It's good to know how this works for funky situations, but as Stonestrong has pointed out, you don't necessarily have to know these exact numbers and their exact result to be effective. In the end, if your hate transfers don't suck, and you don't suck, you'll generally be fine.</blockquote>41% of what + 19% of what + 17% of what?See the thing is your taking 41% of 8000 hate and say 19% of 6000 hate, and 17% of 4000 hate != 77% hate, cause its 77% of what? Where exactly are you going to cap 50%? Now you could suggest that no more than 50% of the aggregrate total could be transfered as in this case the three dps are totalling 18k hate/s and no more than 9k (50% of aggregrate could be transfered. However, I don't believe any aggregrate calculation exists in this case. You then add in hate proc items, trak shields, and other item affects, and it all gets dodgy.I have actually discussed this in person with Aeralik, so I'm not sure you need to quote his posts, as if you read what he said he never clarified 50% of what.But mostly I agree with the latter part I quoted you on.</blockquote> hate like casting and recast and many other abilitys are capped at 50% but people make the mistake of reading the "50%" value on their tool tip as they being capped when in fact "100%" value on their tool tip actualy equals the 50% cap. either way a transfer >>>>> a deagro. group moderate is not the answer.

Rahatmattata

12-01-2009, 05:17 AM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>To gain aoe aggro, we should sacrafice survivability.Otherwise, we'd be grossly OP.</blockquote>So what you are saying is also for an aoe tank to gain single target aggro, they should sacrifice survivability.Otherwise, they'd be grossly OP <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/0a4d7238daa496a758252d0a2b1a1384.gif" border="0" />Anyway, this whole aggro balance discussion that's been going on for the last year is getting tiring. Dozens of ideas have been tossed around, some good, some suck. Everyone has said what they think of balance and what should be done. IDK, I guess it's fun to argue about. Just look at any fighter thread in the history of these forums.

therodge

12-01-2009, 07:35 AM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>Divide 50 (the cap that you are normalizing down to) by the sum of all transfers (for example, 41 + 19 + 17 = 77). Now multiply each transfer by the result (about 0.65, rounded). This will tell you how much each transfer actually contributes after normalization (approximately 26.7%, 12.3%, and 11% respectively). You can see that after normalization, they will add up to 50% (barring any issues with rounding).It's good to know how this works for funky situations, but as Stonestrong has pointed out, you don't necessarily have to know these exact numbers and their exact result to be effective. In the end, if your hate transfers don't suck, and you don't suck, you'll generally be fine.</blockquote>41% of what + 19% of what + 17% of what?See the thing is your taking 41% of 8000 hate and say 19% of 6000 hate, and 17% of 4000 hate != 77% hate, cause its 77% of what? Where exactly are you going to cap 50%? Now you could suggest that no more than 50% of the aggregrate total could be transfered as in this case the three dps are totalling 18k hate/s and no more than 9k (50% of aggregrate could be transfered. However, I don't believe any aggregrate calculation exists in this case. You then add in hate proc items, trak shields, and other item affects, and it all gets dodgy.I have actually discussed this in person with Aeralik, so I'm not sure you need to quote his posts, as if you read what he said he never clarified 50% of what.But mostly I agree with the latter part I quoted you on.</blockquote>The game doesent regonise the of whats your speaking off, all it recognizes is the total number of the percent, as said it would have been best if you thouroughly read the thread i linked as it has all pertenent information far better then my words can express, the game recgonizes the number of percent transfered to the transferee, and not the numbers associated with it so 41+19+17=77 but the game cuts those numbers accordingly so they =50 total, then does the calculation of how much is transfered for each person. the hate numbers do not matter simply the percent labed on the ability itself.at this point i have already derailed this to far if you wish to continue the debate lets take it to pms, as i beileve this thread deserves its right to be kept on trackThe only thing in game that bypassess the 50% limit is sigil, the trak sheild does not.

EverRude

12-01-2009, 09:10 AM

Atan@Unrest wrote: Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote: Atan@Unrest wrote: To gain aoe aggro, we should sacrafice survivability. Otherwise, we'd be grossly OP. Let's face it, if you have 6 mobs banging on you instead of one, any tank's survivability is already compromised automatically. Actually in practice I disagree. Tanking 6 mobs has rarely been a survivability check, in my experience its an aggro management check. I can room pull a dozen encounters with my SK and burn them all down with no survivabilitiy issue, If I attempt the same on my guardian, I'll typically be the last to die as I've got all the survivability I need but no effective method of keeping the mobs interested in me. Now, if I have the aggro issue solved and I can keep them on me AND I get to keep my significantly higher survivability than my sk, I've just created a grossly OP class. If however, I sacrafice my survivability bonuses and actualy become lesss survivable to gain aoe hate, I feel we're talking about a much more balanced approach. The SK still wins out in AOE dps, he wins out at higher survivability vs aoe encounters, but the guardian is provided a reasonable risk/reward tradeoff to not be useless in aoe encounters. Fact is, if you make a guard able to hold aggro in all scenarios, they become nearly defacto the best tank class, and I would never make such a suggestion as 'balancing' any class.*Trying to use quote with my blackberry. It'll probably look like crap. I think the SK pulling a room and survivability not being an issue is a result of the SK's reaver line and huge number of blue AoE's keeping his health moderated. If a guard could hold aggro on the entire encounter without his survivability I believe the healer would have to work their butt off. I believe it's dps the guardian should be sacrifising for aggro not survivabilty.

Yimway

12-01-2009, 12:35 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I believe it's dps the guardian should be sacrifising for aggro not survivabilty.</blockquote>If dps was independant of aggro I could maybe agree with you. As intricately as they are entertwined, that is not a viable option.Already being single target focused lowers our dps potential significantly, further sacrafices in an attempt to gain aggro will prove problematic given eq2's game mechanics.As far as the reaver line and lifetaps, do some room pulls and sum up the amount the SK heals, its not as much as it might appear to be.

Yimway

12-01-2009, 12:37 PM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote>The game doesent regonise the of whats your speaking off, all it recognizes is the total number of the percent, as said it would have been best if you thouroughly read the thread i linked as it has all pertenent information far better then my words can express, the game recgonizes the number of percent transfered to the transferee, and not the numbers associated with it so 41+19+17=77 but the game cuts those numbers accordingly so they =50 total, then does the calculation of how much is transfered for each person. the hate numbers do not matter simply the percent labed on the ability itself.</blockquote>This is incredibly easy to proove false, if I get some time I'll do so to demonstrate.

EverRude

12-01-2009, 01:35 PM

Atan@Unrest wrote: EverRude wrote: I believe it's dps the guardian should be sacrifising for aggro not survivabilty. If dps was independant of aggro I could maybe agree with you. As intricately as they are entertwined, that is not a viable option. Already being single target focused lowers our dps potential significantly, further sacrafices in an attempt to gain aggro will prove problematic given eq2's game mechanics. As far as the reaver line and lifetaps, do some room pulls and sum up the amount the SK heals, its not as much as it might appear to be. I plan to do a test this evening. I'll zone both my guard and my sk into HoF or NA and try to solo the first group of mobs parsing the results. It's my guess that the SK will survive longer. Due to his self healing. He may even win due to his dps. Since both my tanks have nearly identical gear I think it would be a good test of survivabilty. The dps is obvious and just for icing. I think running both through 5x would be sufficient. You could do it as well Atan if your guys are equally equipped. Ofcourse with enough gear either could survive. But my guys are herioc only equipped with no myth. No chance the guard will live through a toe to toe fight with the first NA encounter. The purpose for doing this is just to show that even in defensive the guardian may not have more survivabilty than the SK in heroic content and therefore should not be required to give up even more defence to compete for aggro. I also believe that there are plenty of spells that could be give to guards to improve his aggro even in AE content without sacrifising defence or increase dps. Altho I still feel my group moderate is a better choice to deal with the taunt vs. Dps gap for now.

RafaelSmith

12-01-2009, 04:09 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Atan@Unrest wrote: EverRude wrote: I believe it's dps the guardian should be sacrifising for aggro not survivabilty. If dps was independant of aggro I could maybe agree with you. As intricately as they are entertwined, that is not a viable option. Already being single target focused lowers our dps potential significantly, further sacrafices in an attempt to gain aggro will prove problematic given eq2's game mechanics. As far as the reaver line and lifetaps, do some room pulls and sum up the amount the SK heals, its not as much as it might appear to be. I plan to do a test this evening. I'll zone both my guard and my sk into HoF or NA and try to solo the first group of mobs parsing the results. It's my guess that the SK will survive longer. Due to his self healing. He may even win due to his dps. Since both my tanks have nearly identical gear I think it would be a good test of survivabilty. The dps is obvious and just for icing. I think running both through 5x would be sufficient. You could do it as well Atan if your guys are equally equipped. Ofcourse with enough gear either could survive. But my guys are herioc only equipped with no myth. No chance the guard will live through a toe to toe fight with the first NA encounter. The purpose for doing this is just to show that even in defensive the guardian may not have more survivabilty than the SK in heroic content and therefore should not be required to give up even more defence to compete for aggro. I also believe that there are plenty of spells that could be give to guards to improve his aggro even in AE content without sacrifising defence or increase dps. Altho I still feel my group moderate is a better choice to deal with the taunt vs. Dps gap for now.</blockquote>I am curious to see what your results are. Pretty good idea of what they will be.I think what a lot of people fail to realize is that things like aggro, DPS and surviveability have different definitions in heroic content -vs- raid. While it maybe that a Guard does have higher surviveablity that actually makes a difference for raiding...........he does not for heroic.....in fact he has far less than an SK. I know for a fact that an SK friend of mine "lives thru" heroic stuff that I have no hope of "living" thru even with the same buffs and heals. But when it comes to raids.......at least according to ACT i do take less overall DMG than he does.......we both "live thru" it but thats because the rest of the raid helps us. As far as AGGRO -vs- DPS...........in raids they actually are seperate things........its possible to hold aggro well in a raid and have craptastic DPS. In heroics the two are the same.......there is no aggro without DPS. Surviveability in heroic content is the least important factor for a tank.Which is why I disagree completely with how players like Bruner define balance. You can't balance a class or set of classes using Raid performance -vs- everything else as the only factor. A Guardian in a raid setting is not the same class as a Guardian in a heroic setting. Its somewhat true for all classes........but for Guardian the difference seems to be much more drastic.

Bruener

12-01-2009, 05:24 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Which is why I disagree completely with how players like Bruner define balance. You can't balance a class or set of classes using Raid performance -vs- everything else as the only factor. A Guardian in a raid setting is not the same class as a Guardian in a heroic setting. Its somewhat true for all classes........but for Guardian the difference seems to be much more drastic.</blockquote>The problem is trying to seperate the balance at one level without affecting the other level. Hence giving Guards a big boost in agro, specifically quite a bit more AE agro, will change things drastically at the raid level because there would be no reason to use any other tank for the OT spot. The point of most of my posts is to counter the ideas that while they would fix issues at the heroic level they would also OP Guards at the raid level.Group Moderate, or multiple conc slot moderate would go a long ways to help Guards at the heroic level with agro....that is the issue they have. At the same time it would not have much of an effect at the raid level.Giving Guards a slightly higher taunt crit bonus once they implement that mechanic would mean that Guards could produce more hate than now...NOT THRU DPS....but it would not be a huge increase like some seem to be asking for. Again it would make a big difference at the heroic level and smaller difference at the raid level.Finally the biggest change that would affect both levels of play is giving Guards 1 true AE taunt that does a small amount of CA damage. Keep it on a fairly long recast timer, like 2 min. This would give the Guards that instant AE agro they need at the heroic level to hold a large amount of mobs long enough for true AE dps classes to burn them down. Also, combined with Reinforce since it does damage it would allow the Guard to jump 1 hate position on each mob around him as well. At the raid level, yes it gives a Guard one extra small tool, but honestly it is not going to be enough to push them into the OT spot as well.Now there is no way you can argue that these 3 items would help out Guards at the heroic level a lot...which is agro control. The best thing about them is the fact that they don't have a lot of effect on Guards at the raid level where things are much more balanced. What won't suprise me is the people that are going to respond to this thread that don't see it as enough. They honestly want to be OP'd again...and it isn't going to happen. If they want to be an AE/OT than roll a class that is better suited to that type of play style. If you want to be the most survivable tank in the game than keep the Guard. People asking for more than what actually needs to be tweaked are just being ridiculous.

RafaelSmith

12-01-2009, 05:38 PM

I think everyone agrees that at the top end raid game the 4 plates are pretty well "balanced".....which means that they need to take the same approach they did in bringing the SKs closer to Guards for raids and apply it to Guards for heroic.Ideally they need to "boost" Guardian heroic level DPS/aggro by the same margin that they boosted SK surviveability at the raid level.Relatively speaking the "edge" that Guards have in surviveability for raids should be equal to the "edge" that SKs have in DPS/aggro for heroic.This really should have happened at the same time that SKs were fixed. It didn't which is why when you look at the two classes across all the games content (heroic and raid) SKs appear OP. They got to keep their superiority for heroic content and were given what they needed to compete at the raid level.

Grumpy_Warrior_01

12-01-2009, 05:48 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>...Which is why I disagree completely with how players like Bruner define balance. You can't balance a class or set of classes using Raid performance -vs- everything else as the only factor. A Guardian in a raid setting is not the same class as a Guardian in a heroic setting. Its somewhat true for all classes........but for Guardian the difference seems to be much more drastic.</blockquote>The SK would have us focus only on raids, because otherwise we might compare warriors to crusaders on grounds other than the technicals of tanking a raid boss. If we did, we might remember that crusaders collectively are granted AoE stuns, AoE interrupts, AoE dots, dispells, debuffs, single heal, group heal, self heal, instant heal, cure, ward, real death prevent, single hate transfer, group hate transfer, 24-position aoe snap, lifetap, manatap, strength tap, mitigation tap, feign death, evac, resurrect. And that's not even looking at AA's.Warriors get what, bind wound?Somebody explain to me again why a guardian should accept a defensive hit in order to do his most basic job as well as any other fighter. On the contrary, if crusaders have dozens of real benefits that warriors will never see, day in and day out at the touch of a button, then they should also be demonstrably more fragile than warriors in all combat scenarios. Group Moderate only scratches the surface toward true class balance.

RafaelSmith

12-01-2009, 06:36 PM

<cite>Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>...Which is why I disagree completely with how players like Bruner define balance. You can't balance a class or set of classes using Raid performance -vs- everything else as the only factor. A Guardian in a raid setting is not the same class as a Guardian in a heroic setting. Its somewhat true for all classes........but for Guardian the difference seems to be much more drastic.</blockquote>The SK would have us focus only on raids, because otherwise we might compare warriors to crusaders on grounds other than the technicals of tanking a raid boss. If we did, we might remember that crusaders collectively are granted AoE stuns, AoE interrupts, AoE dots, dispells, debuffs, single heal, group heal, self heal, instant heal, cure, ward, real death prevent, single hate transfer, group hate transfer, 24-position aoe snap, lifetap, manatap, strength tap, mitigation tap, feign death, evac, resurrect. And that's not even looking at AA's.Warriors get what, bind wound?Somebody explain to me again why a guardian should accept a defensive hit in order to do his most basic job as well as any other fighter. On the contrary, if crusaders have dozens of real benefits that warriors will never see, day in and day out at the touch of a button, then they should also be demonstrably more fragile than warriors in all combat scenarios. Group Moderate only scratches the surface toward true class balance.</blockquote>Group Moderate would be nothing more than a bandaid. The problem is much bigger and involves much more than Guardian and SK. I just dont think SOE can create true class balance...EQ2s classes and game mechanics prevent it. Was flawed from its inception 5+ years ago.

EverRude

12-01-2009, 09:26 PM

Ok here's the results of my "survivability test." These are heroic tanks with no raid gear at all using fabled epic. Both in Full T2 armor and both in defensive stance. Both have 50/50 master vs. expert spells. Both self buffed with no totems or anything other than food and drink.80 Guardian 200 AA. In defensive stance wearing defensive gear. (something few guardian can actually play with full time)Hitpoints: 13082Mitigation: 61.8% (6028 ) w/ Hunker 65.6% (7189) w/ Hunker and Battle Cry 67.9% (8060)Avoidance: 68.5% (11784)80 Shadowknight 191 AA. In defensive stance wearing the only gear he needs.Hitpoints: 11139Mitigation: 60.7% (5719)Avoidance: 57.3% (9324)Clearly as everyone expects the Guardian appears superior on paper. More Hitpoints, avoidance and mitigation. So in theory his the superior tank. Let's see if theory is reality.I did not use the special "save" skills both classes have in 5 fights. Skills like Stone Sphere (guard) and Divine Aura (SK). The idea is anything that takes longer than 3 min to recast will not be used every fight unless you're going very slowly through heroic contact. Otherwise that stuff is saved for "oh crap" situations and named. I'm testing survivability through heroic content in the average situation not the "oh crap" ones.Both these guys did eveything they could to stay alive. DPS was secondary. Ofcourse there's little a Guard can do to stay alive in AE content. I cast hunker and battle cry just before pull. Those are pretty much the only skills available to us on a fast recast we could use on nearly every fight if we choose to.The reason I am testing AE, is that Atan stated that to pickup more AE aggro the Guardian class needs to loose survivability. That in AE fights survivability was less of an issue. It's my contention the guard cannot afford to loose more survivability. And it's AE content a guard is particularly vulnerable to.Here's the results...Necrotic Asylum. The first group of mobs after zone in. Level 83 group of 4 ^^. These are the total results of 5 fights.The Guardian:Duration: 8 to 16 secs. Average 12 sec.Damage Taken: 82,654Incoming DPS: 992Outgoing Damage: 96222Outgoing DPS: 1300Healed: 0The Shadowknight:Duration: 10 - 18 secs. Average 14 sec.Damage Taken: 133087Incoming DPS: 1415Outgoing Damage: 285711Outgoing DPS: 3040Healed: 48748The SK took more damage as expected due to his lack of defence compared to guardian. That's expected. The SK did more dps by a considerable margin. Again that's expected. What shouldn't be expected is the SK lived longer on average than the Guardian. The fact is, if the one thing that guardian has the advantage at is survivability he should live longer in every fight compared to any other tank. But that's not the case. The SK has superior DPS, Aggro, and Survivability.I know plenty of you will knitpick and want specific gear and spell levels. Want to argue I am somehow misrepresenting the facts. But the results are clear to me. The SK life taps and Reaver line far surpasses the Guardian's innate superior defence when fighting heroic content.My point in doing this test is to show that the Guardian class cannot afford to continue to give up defence for aggro. We're already inferior in every category (dps, aggro, solo, utility) and in real world survivability. Let's please everyone get off the "but guardian will OP if they get..." bandwagon. Group or multitarget Moderate would help Guards in heroic content without affecting raids. And we should not have to give up anything more to get it. Edit: Wanted to be fair. Tap Veins II Grandmaster was a crucial factor in the SK's survivability. But with a 33 sec recast it is hardly a "oh crap" spell and is fully useable in nearly every fight in heroic content. It was responsible if 46% of the healing in these enounters for the SK. So Reaver line is not solely responsible for the SK's survivability.Second Edit: Just for fun I decided to send the Guard through the same mobs for one death in D Stance w/ DPS gear then O stance w/ DPS gear. Stats in D Stance with DPS gear...HP 12437Mit 61.4 (5904)Avd 56.8 (8616)Duration: 7 secDmg Out: 13576DPS out: 1939Inc Dmg: 13786Inc DPS: 1969Stats in O Stance with DPS gear...HP 12437Mit 57.4 (4973)Avd 43.2 (6396)Duration: 5 secDmg Out: 11669DPS out: 2333Inc Dmg: 13065Inc DPS: 2613Didn't feel like testing further since I would have to travel to repair then return. This second test was just for fun since I was there already. And since most Guards aren't using a shield and are dps'ng to maximize aggro it is related data to the subject of this post.

Bruener

12-01-2009, 11:15 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok here's the results of my "survivability test." These are heroic tanks with no raid gear at all using fabled epic. Both in Full T2 armor and both in defensive stance. Both have 50/50 master vs. expert spells. Both self buffed with no totems or anything other than food and drink.80 Guardian 200 AA. In defensive stance wearing defensive gear. (something few guardian can actually play with full time)Hitpoints: 13082Mitigation: 61.8% (6028 ) w/ Hunker 65.6% (7189) w/ Hunker and Battle Cry 67.9% (8060)Avoidance: 68.5% (11784)80 Shadowknight 191 AA. In defensive stance wearing the only gear he needs.Hitpoints: 11139Mitigation: 60.7% (5719)Avoidance: 57.3% (9324)Clearly as everyone expects the Guardian appears superior on paper. More Hitpoints, avoidance and mitigation. So in theory his the superior tank. Let's see if theory is reality.I did not use the special "save" skills both classes have in 5 fights. Skills like Stone Sphere (guard) and Divine Aura (SK). The idea is anything that takes longer than 3 min to recast will not be used every fight unless you're going very slowly through heroic contact. Otherwise that stuff is saved for "oh crap" situations and named. I'm testing survivability through heroic content in the average situation not the "oh crap" ones.Both these guys did eveything they could to stay alive. DPS was secondary. Ofcourse there's little a Guard can do to stay alive in AE content. I cast hunker and battle cry just before pull. Those are pretty much the only skills available to us on a fast recast we could use on nearly every fight if we choose to.The reason I am testing AE, is that Atan stated that to pickup more AE aggro the Guardian class needs to loose survivability. That in AE fights survivability was less of an issue. It's my contention the guard cannot afford to loose more survivability. And it's AE content a guard is particularly vulnerable to.Here's the results...Necrotic Asylum. The first group of mobs after zone in. Level 83 group of 4 ^^. These are the total results of 5 fights.The Guardian:Duration: 8 to 16 secs. Average 12 sec.Damage Taken: 82,654Incoming DPS: 992Outgoing Damage: 96222Outgoing DPS: 1300Healed: 0The Shadowknight:Duration: 10 - 18 secs. Average 14 sec.Damage Taken: 133087Incoming DPS: 1415Outgoing Damage: 285711Outgoing DPS: 3040Healed: 48748The SK took more damage as expected due to his lack of defence compared to guardian. That's expected. The SK did more dps by a considerable margin. Again that's expected. What shouldn't be expected is the SK lived longer on average than the Guardian. The fact is, if the one thing that guardian has the advantage at is survivability he should live longer in every fight compared to any other tank. But that's not the case. The SK has superior DPS, Aggro, and Survivability.I know plenty of you will knitpick and want specific gear and spell levels. Want to argue I am somehow misrepresenting the facts. But the results are clear to me. The SK life taps and Reaver line far surpasses the Guardian's innate superior defence when fighting heroic content.My point in doing this test is to show that the Guardian class cannot afford to continue to give up defence for aggro. We're already inferior in every category (dps, aggro, solo, utility) and in real world survivability. Let's please everyone get off the "but guardian will OP if they get..." bandwagon. Group or multitarget Moderate would help Guards in heroic content without affecting raids. And we should not have to give up anything more to get it. Edit: Wanted to be fair. Tap Veins II Grandmaster was a crucial factor in the SK's survivability. But with a 33 sec recast it is hardly a "oh crap" spell and is fully useable in nearly every fight in heroic content. It was responsible if 46% of the healing in these enounters for the SK. So Reaver line is not solely responsible for the SK's survivability.Second Edit: Just for fun I decided to send the Guard through the same mobs for one death in D Stance w/ DPS gear then O stance w/ DPS gear. Stats in D Stance with DPS gear...HP 12437Mit 61.4 (5904)Avd 56.8 (8616)Duration: 7 secDmg Out: 13576DPS out: 1939Inc Dmg: 13786Inc DPS: 1969Stats in O Stance with DPS gear...HP 12437Mit 57.4 (4973)Avd 43.2 (6396)Duration: 5 secDmg Out: 11669DPS out: 2333Inc Dmg: 13065Inc DPS: 2613Didn't feel like testing further since I would have to travel to repair then return. This second test was just for fun since I was there already. And since most Guards aren't using a shield and are dps'ng to maximize aggro it is related data to the subject of this post.</blockquote>Your whole "test" is ridiculous. Yes when solo a SK lifetaps are going to help quite a bit to stay alive a couple extra seconds. What you fail to actually "test" is that SK lifetaps do nothing when their health is full, or the fact that they aren't so fantastic when there is actually a healer around that can cover the hp loss on both tanks with one button.You want a better test of survivability zone your 2 tanks into Zarrakon and have them run in and take a hit. Time them and record how much damage each tank takes. Now do that 100 times and come back and tell us the difference in survivability than.

Grumpy_Warrior_01

12-02-2009, 01:45 AM

RafaelSmith

12-02-2009, 03:23 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>You want a better test of survivability zone your 2 tanks into Zarrakon and have them run in and take a hit. Time them and record how much damage each tank takes. Now do that 100 times and come back and tell us the difference in survivability than.</blockquote>Can you even read? The test he did was against Heroic content not your godamn raid which is all you talk about even when the discussion isnt even about raiding. He was running 2 of the easier TSO instances......the best you can counter with is to say a better test is Zarrakon? Apples and Oranges. Also, to add insult ot injury, he could have run that test in the easiest of the TSO instances..........DEEP FORGE....a SINGLE TARGET one to be exact and the results would have bene exactly the same if not more biased toward the SK.You claim that a Guardian is working as intended because he has advantage in surviveability. I believe he said both the Guard and SK he used were close in terms of gear level so the test is fair. Yep Guard had paperdoll higher surviveability (HP, avoid, mit, yada yada)..........well not sure what planet you are from but higher surviveability should mean lasting longer? if not then whats the point? Or maybe where we fail to realize that something like an SKs lifetaps mean nothing when his health is full.....you fail to realize that what few % of extra mit/avoid/HP a Guard may have on paper means nothing outside of a few extreme select raid mobs?I can guarantee....based on similar comparisons ive done that the results he got would hold true in any instance at any level of gear. Outside of top end controlled raiding......SK while having lesser surviveability "stats" in fact has superior surviveability...DPS/AGGRO and utility....especially the only stat that really counts.......STAYING UP. I know several good healers....across all the healer classes and each and every one will tell you that all things being equal(gear and skill) that SK is easier to heal....groups tanked by SKs run smoother and faster and without the frustrations they normally face with a Guard as tank. The reason is because at this level of content SK already exceeds the required amount of surviveability so that variable becomes mute......a Guard exeeds its even more but its all wasted. The other variables of what makes a tank a tank take on a larger role....DPS, Aggro, Utility........all of which Guard has the worse of all the fighters.

Lethe5683

12-02-2009, 03:23 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Your whole "test" is ridiculous. Yes when solo a SK lifetaps are going to help quite a bit to stay alive a couple extra seconds. What you fail to actually "test" is that SK lifetaps do nothing when their health is full, or the fact that they aren't so fantastic when there is actually a healer around that can cover the hp loss on both tanks with one button.You want a better test of survivability zone your 2 tanks into Zarrakon and have them run in and take a hit. Time them and record how much damage each tank takes. Now do that 100 times and come back and tell us the difference in survivability than.</blockquote>Clearly a SK.

Rahatmattata

12-02-2009, 05:18 AM

You are all wasting your breath... erm, the muscles in your fingeers.Nerf Crusaders, buff warriors, make brawlers dps, yay done.

EverRude

12-02-2009, 06:38 AM

Bruener wrote: Your whole "test" is ridiculous. Yes when solo a SK lifetaps are going to help quite a bit to stay alive a couple extra seconds. What you fail to actually "test" is that SK lifetaps do nothing when their health is full, or the fact that they aren't so fantastic when there is actually a healer around that can cover the hp loss on both tanks with one button. You want a better test of survivability zone your 2 tanks into Zarrakon and have them run in and take a hit. Time them and record how much damage each tank takes. Now do that 100 times and come back and tell us the difference in survivability than. The responce I expected from Bruener. Defend SK at all costs. Even though I am not attacking SK's. All I intended to do was prove that the guardian survivability was not the edge some would claim in heroic content. It's funny that even Bruener supports my idea of a version of group moderate because he knows we need a boost for heroic. But when I test some heroic encounters he screams I should test raid. Funny. Bruener brother, I didn't want to do this test. But if you played Guardian you'd get tired of hearing how you should be [Removed for Content] in every other area cause you're survivability is best. I just wanted to prove that in heroic content that is not as true as it probably is in Raid content. A Paladin may have had simular results to the SK but the cast times of his heals would have prevented him from DPS'ng. He may have stayed alive as long but he would not have done crap for dps while doing it. But I can't test that yet. This is hardly the most accurate test. I am sure they're are some pices of gear and maybe a spell or 2 or some AA builds I can tweak to make the guard come out better and the SK come out worse. But the fact is these are my tanks playing in the gear, with the spells, and with the AA builds I play them in when playing in heroic groups. It was accurate enough for what I needed to test. Even with something like group moderate the SK will still win in every category. But atleast the guardian could play without having to build special groups to do it. The Guardian should not have to give up anything to get it. We gave up enough at the end of RoK and start of TSO.

EverRude

12-02-2009, 08:40 AM

Just wanted to add a word about Beserkers. They don't have the defence of the Guard or the self healing of the crusaders. In this survivabilty test it's my belief they would have done the worst. There's no need for a guard to further [Removed for Content] his defence for ae aggro and dps. That class already exists. Beserker.That's why I don't support the idea of adding more ae or dps to Guard. Could we use it? Definitely. Do we need it? No. There's plenty of content we can do without it. I say we need more aggro ability or the ability to moderate the hate of our group. We can not only use it, we NEED it. There is no content we can do right now without bringing along other classes to do the aggro control for us.

Bruener

12-02-2009, 03:17 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Your whole "test" is ridiculous. Yes when solo a SK lifetaps are going to help quite a bit to stay alive a couple extra seconds. What you fail to actually "test" is that SK lifetaps do nothing when their health is full, or the fact that they aren't so fantastic when there is actually a healer around that can cover the hp loss on both tanks with one button.You want a better test of survivability zone your 2 tanks into Zarrakon and have them run in and take a hit. Time them and record how much damage each tank takes. Now do that 100 times and come back and tell us the difference in survivability than.</blockquote>Clearly a SK.</blockquote>Yes a SK. And the problem with the stupid test is taht he went into a heroic zone and pulled a group of AE mobs solo with each class. That is ridiculous because that is not heroic content...that is talking about solo survivability at that point. My point is that that is not even close to an accurate test because the SK lived for 2 sec longer in a heroic zone where popping TA at the right time will refresh their hps to give him 2 seconds in a 10 second fight. Get realistic and do the test with what is required....healers. All the test proved is that yes SKs are better at solo in a heroic zone. I think everybody knew that.The reason I mentioned the Zarrakon test because it is a ridiculous as this supposed test. At least with a Zarrakon test you actually get the break down on the damage taken per hit which is what survivability is about. If you simpletons can't seem to figure that out and get your clouds out of the "raid" argument than go do the same test on a hard hitting heroic encounter. That is what survivability is about...its not about a Guard lasting 8 seconds in an AE encounter in heroic versus a SK lasting 10 sec in the same encounter.The test in no way proves the hypothesis. Take those same 2 tanks and load them up with a healer on each and than do the same thing. See which tank takes less dps through the encounter. A SK lifetaps mean jack when their health is full.You guys are amazing and will create any bogus type of test to try and prove false information. Ridiculous. I have a friend that is a Wiz that can probably survive that encounter longer than both those with his stoneskins. Must mean Wizards have better survivability than both. Yeah, pretty dumb huh?

Bruener

12-02-2009, 03:19 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just wanted to add a word about Beserkers. They don't have the defence ofthe Guard or the self healing of the crusaders. In this survivabilty test it's my belief they would have done the worst. There's no need for a guard to further [Removed for Content] his defence for ae aggro and dps. That class already exists. Beserker.That's why I don't support the idea of adding more ae or dps to Guard. Could we use it? Definitely. Do we need it? No. There's plenty of content we can do without it. I say we need more aggro ability or the ability to moderate the hate of our group. We can not only use it, we NEED it. There is no content we can do right now without bringing along other classes to do the aggro control for us.</blockquote>And again further showing how much you don't understand. Adrenaline alone means that Zerkers would take half the damage of any other tank and would probably survive twice as long as both tanks in that situation. Or do we not consider using abilities? Because you are using SK lifetaps and you are using Guard temp buffs.

EverRude

12-02-2009, 03:41 PM

I actually agree with Bruener about the raid level difference. If there is a simular defence difference at raid level as my tanks have at heroic. That extra 10% avoidance and mitigation could make a difference. I just feel the SK's life taps cancel out most of the guard's advantage at heroic level.

EverRude

12-02-2009, 03:58 PM

Bruener did you even read the results I posted? You seem to be saying your raid test would prove the SK would take more damage than the Guard. My test showed the SK take a lot more damage than the guard. I posted the damage amounts noit just duration. The guard had better defence but the SK had better survivability due to his self healing. I don't have a zerker at this level. I doubt my 43 zerk can tell me anything about his capabilties at cap. If the adrenline you mentioned is castable as often as Tap Veins then it would certainly be included. If it's a 3 min recast like Divine Aura or Guardian Sphere then no it would not count. We all have abilties that can extend our survival on long recast. The argument that this is just a solo test is bogus. I have used Tap Veins to save myself plenty during heroic fights. The life taps reduce the amount the healer has to heal. The guardian starts a fight with more hitpoints but the SK creates more hitpoints for himself on the fly while full on DPS'ng. Stop talking to me like I'm a Guardian talking about SK. I'm an SK telling you what I do in game, in groups, that make us superior to Guards. You saying that the life taps only help in solo combat and I say that is BS. I play SK everyday and I know better.

Bruener

12-02-2009, 04:30 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't have a zerker at this level. I doubt my 43 zerk can tell me anything about his capabilties at cap. If the adrenline you mentioned is castable as often as Tap Veins then it would certainly be included. If it's a 3 min recast like Divine Aura or Guardian Sphere then no it would not count. We all have abilties that can extend our survival on long recast. The argument that this is just a solo test is bogus. I have used Tap Veins to save myself plenty during heroic fights. The life taps reduce the amount the healer has to heal. Stop talking to me like I'm a Guardian talking about SK. I'm an SK telling you what I do in game, in groups, that make us superior to Guards. You saying that the life taps only help in solo combat and I say that is BS. I play SK everyday and I know better.</blockquote>Even more reason that the test is not accurate. So now we are throwing out abilities that have a recast longer than 3 mintues. That means that the Guard ability ToS can be counted. And yes Adrenaline has a recast time of less than 2 minutes which means that it in fact in your study could be used.I guess than based on the study completed we can definitely say that Zerkers have the highest survivability out of all tanks. Oh wait, recast on monk Tsunami will be less than 3 minutes....I guess monks win.Furthermore what is the definition of an AE fight? 2 or more means multiple mobs which is the argument on an entirely different thread saying there are way moer AE fights in TSO. Well a 2 mob encounter with a Guard using ToS is going to be a lot different than an 8 mob encounter with that ability. Vice versa a 2 mob encounter with AE lifetap healing on a 2 mob encounter for a SK is a lot different than an 8 mob encounter with those same lifetaps. Oh, and now we have to consider the level of the mobs too. An AE level 80 encounter with avoidance and mit difference is going to be a lot different than an AE level 85 encounter.Can you see why there are so many holes in this example of using a solo surviving test in heroic content?

EverRude

12-02-2009, 04:47 PM

I edited the post you quoted apparently while you were posting. Sorry. May wanna update or atleast read it again. Most of it was for you. Now to address this new stuff you're complaining about. I said I only did this test to show Atan survivabilty was an issue for guards more so than SK in heroic AE encounters. My test was accurate enough to prove that. Knitpick and run all the logic loops you want. Life taps make SK equal to or better than Guards survivabilty in heroic fights. Atleast in AE heroic fights. And yes the more non-arrow or arrow down mobs the better for SK. I apparently hit a sensitive spot for you. Sorry. I wasn't attacking sk's or you. I just wanted to argue the point that guards needed to give up even more survivabilty.*added a clarifier about AE heroics

EverRude

12-02-2009, 05:19 PM

Btw I specifically state that I was leaving out the long recast skills due to the fact they are typically saved for named or "oh crap" situations. In addition I didn't want to have to wait even more time to do a run waiting for that recast stuff to refresh. How about you go back and actually read the test post all the way through. You've now made several posts that clearly show you ignored several things I posted.

Bruener

12-02-2009, 05:40 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I specifically state that I was leaving out the long recast skills due to the fact they are typically saved for named or "oh crap" situations. In addition I didn't want to have to wait even more time to do a run waiting for that recast stuff to refresh. How about you go back and actually read the test post all the way through. You've now made several posts that clearly show you ignored several things I posted.</blockquote>Please define "long recast skills". Thanks.Furthermore let me actually fix your hypothesis so your data supports it."Now to address this new stuff you're complaining about. I said I only did this test to show Atan survivabilty was an issue for guards more so than SK when solo in heroic AE encounters. My test was accurate enough to prove that. "

RafaelSmith

12-02-2009, 05:41 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Your whole "test" is ridiculous. Yes when solo a SK lifetaps are going to help quite a bit to stay alive a couple extra seconds. What you fail to actually "test" is that SK lifetaps do nothing when their health is full, or the fact that they aren't so fantastic when there is actually a healer around that can cover the hp loss on both tanks with one button.You want a better test of survivability zone your 2 tanks into Zarrakon and have them run in and take a hit. Time them and record how much damage each tank takes. Now do that 100 times and come back and tell us the difference in survivability than.</blockquote>Clearly a SK.</blockquote>Yes a SK. And the problem with the stupid test is taht he went into a heroic zone and pulled a group of AE mobs solo with each class. That is ridiculous because that is not heroic content...that is talking about solo survivability at that point. My point is that that is not even close to an accurate test because the SK lived for 2 sec longer in a heroic zone where popping TA at the right time will refresh their hps to give him 2 seconds in a 10 second fight. Get realistic and do the test with what is required....healers. All the test proved is that yes SKs are better at solo in a heroic zone. I think everybody knew that.The reason I mentioned the Zarrakon test because it is a ridiculous as this supposed test. At least with a Zarrakon test you actually get the break down on the damage taken per hit which is what survivability is about. If you simpletons can't seem to figure that out and get your clouds out of the "raid" argument than go do the same test on a hard hitting heroic encounter. That is what survivability is about...its not about a Guard lasting 8 seconds in an AE encounter in heroic versus a SK lasting 10 sec in the same encounter.The test in no way proves the hypothesis. Take those same 2 tanks and load them up with a healer on each and than do the same thing. See which tank takes less dps through the encounter. A SK lifetaps mean jack when their health is full.You guys are amazing and will create any bogus type of test to try and prove false information. Ridiculous. I have a friend that is a Wiz that can probably survive that encounter longer than both those with his stoneskins. Must mean Wizards have better survivability than both. Yeah, pretty dumb huh?</blockquote>No one is denying that a Guard actually takes less DMG thru an encounter. If you actually read his whole post you would see that yes in fact the SK took more DMG..........yet lasted longer. Surviveability comparisons especially at the heroic level cannot be simply looked at from a hit per hit basis. You have to look at the entire encounter and then the entire instance run. We can do what you say........compare actual groups with healers....one with Guard the other with SK........take them into any instance and when its all said and done.......something like ACT will show that yep the Guard takes slightly less DMG ..........yet the healers total amount bealed for the run would be higher....and I total DMG taken by the group as a whole would be much higher than with the SK. And I think we all know what the comparison between # of rezes would show =PThis actually carries on thru early tiers of raiding. I know that a WOE run tanked by a Guard -vs- an SK will show the same type of results.......SK = less total healing by the healers, less overall DMG taken by the raid.While it may be that in terms of raiding that the two factors you use to evaluate Balance......Surviveability and Aggro/DPS have equal weight so actual balance can be done.......they do not have equal weight at the heroic level....Aggro and DPS take on a much higher importance while surviveability means less and less. You cant use the same equation to balance.Group moderate would help things somewhat but the scales would still be out of whack. Guards would still need some boosts to AGGRO to make things as balanced at heroic level as they apparantly are for raids.The problem is that in EQ2 currently AGGRO and DPS are not the independent variables they should be they are in fact the same thing......so you cant boost Guard aggro without also boosting their DPS.

EverRude

12-02-2009, 06:29 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I specifically state that I was leaving out the long recast skills due to the fact they are typically saved for named or "oh crap" situations. In addition I didn't want to have to wait even more time to do a run waiting for that recast stuff to refresh. How about you go back and actually read the test post all the way through. You've now made several posts that clearly show you ignored several things I posted.</blockquote>Please define "long recast skills". Thanks.Furthermore let me actually fix your hypothesis so your data supports it."Now to address this new stuff you're complaining about. I said I only did this test to show Atan survivabilty was an issue for guards more so than SK when solo in heroic AE encounters. My test was accurate enough to prove that. "</blockquote>Funny. Riddle me this...If we put the healer with these guys "soloing" these mobs what will that prove? You can see with my current test how much damage they take compared to one another. My way also compares how long they survive. Your way wouldn't appear to prove anything but you would manage to take survival out of the equation. Unless you want to try to run the healer OOM and get them both killed.Also the more other variables I add the the test the more it adds the potential of skewing the results.And I defined long recast in m y first test post. Anything that can't be used on every fight for a normal group running a good pace through a shard zone. That would be pretty much anything that takes longer than 1 min to recast.

therodge

12-03-2009, 12:19 AM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I specifically state that I was leaving out the long recast skills due to the fact they are typically saved for named or "oh crap" situations. In addition I didn't want to have to wait even more time to do a run waiting for that recast stuff to refresh. How about you go back and actually read the test post all the way through. You've now made several posts that clearly show you ignored several things I posted.</blockquote>Please define "long recast skills". Thanks.Furthermore let me actually fix your hypothesis so your data supports it."Now to address this new stuff you're complaining about. I said I only did this test to show Atan survivabilty was an issue for guards more so than SK when solo in heroic AE encounters. My test was accurate enough to prove that. "</blockquote>Funny. Riddle me this...If we put the healer with these guys "soloing" these mobs what will that prove? You can see with my current test how much damage they take compared to one another. My way also compares how long they survive. Your way wouldn't appear to prove anything but you would manage to take survival out of the equation. Unless you want to try to run the healer OOM and get them both killed.Also the more other variables I add the the test the more it adds the potential of skewing the results.And I defined long recast in m y first test post. Anything that can't be used on every fight for a normal group running a good pace through a shard zone. That would be pretty much anything that takes longer than 1 min to recast.</blockquote>if you can try running both toons through a group with the exsact same group setup,something effectivly mid teir (veksar would be good) and list the act parse for amount healed.

EverRude

12-03-2009, 07:04 AM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Btw I specifically state that I was leaving out the long recast skills due to the fact they are typically saved for named or "oh crap" situations. In addition I didn't want to have to wait even more time to do a run waiting for that recast stuff to refresh. How about you go back and actually read the test post all the way through. You've now made several posts that clearly show you ignored several things I posted.</blockquote>Please define "long recast skills". Thanks.Furthermore let me actually fix your hypothesis so your data supports it."Now to address this new stuff you're complaining about. I said I only did this test to show Atan survivabilty was an issue for guards more so than SK when solo in heroic AE encounters. My test was accurate enough to prove that. "</blockquote>Funny. Riddle me this...If we put the healer with these guys "soloing" these mobs what will that prove? You can see with my current test how much damage they take compared to one another. My way also compares how long they survive. Your way wouldn't appear to prove anything but you would manage to take survival out of the equation. Unless you want to try to run the healer OOM and get them both killed.Also the more other variables I add the the test the more it adds the potential of skewing the results.And I defined long recast in m y first test post. Anything that can't be used on every fight for a normal group running a good pace through a shard zone. That would be pretty much anything that takes longer than 1 min to recast.</blockquote>if you can try running both toons through a group with the exsact same group setup,something effectivly mid teir (veksar would be good) and list the act parse for amount healed.</blockquote>And I still question what it could possibly prove that we don't already know? Yes the SK takes more damage.Do you guys think the SK's self healing stops when a real healer is in the group? SK will gain some of his own hitpoints back as he fights. It's what he does. It's what makes him a SK.I guess I derailed my own thread better than anyone else could by answering that call to parse pulls on an AE fight and see what difference the SK life taps really have. That's what I did. I'm not interested in going further with this.I can't win the test debate. Not going to sway voters my way. Not going to debate my way to clear victory. It's a waste to try. I've made my points. Proven them in several post.The guardian survivability in heroic content is overrated. Guards shouldn't need to give up anything to get something like Group Moderate.Group moderate in some form will not OP the Guardian class if it's well thought out. Will not have any effect on raid. It doesn't effect AE or DPS for the guard in any real way. Group moderate could give the guardian flexibility when creating groups. That's all I'm asking for.

Xethren

12-03-2009, 10:40 AM

I would also be in favor of making Moderate usable on more than one person at a time but make it use a con slot for each. Groupies with this buff on them dont rip off me nearly as bad, even high dps classes.

Landiin

12-03-2009, 12:00 PM

<cite>Xethren@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I would also be in favor of making Moderate usable on more than one person at a time but make it use a con slot for each. Groupies with this buff on them dont rip off me nearly as bad, even high dps classes.</blockquote>So you'ed still have it on one person as we only have 1 free con slot.. I guess you could drop some other buffs but not a good idea..

Yimway

12-03-2009, 01:15 PM

EverRude

12-03-2009, 03:03 PM

Atan you posted this before..."To gain aoe aggro, we should sacrafice survivability.Otherwise, we'd be grossly OP."Then later..."Now, if I have the aggro issue solved and I can keep them on me AND I get to keep my significantly higher survivability than my sk, I've just created a grossly OP class. If however, I sacrafice my survivability bonuses and actualy become lesss survivable to gain aoe hate, I feel we're talking about a much more balanced approach.The SK still wins out in AOE dps, he wins out at higher survivability vs aoe encounters, but the guardian is provided a reasonable risk/reward tradeoff to not be useless in aoe encounters.Fact is, if you make a guard able to hold aggro in all scenarios, they become nearly defacto the best tank class, and I would never make such a suggestion as 'balancing' any class."I completely agree with this. But...The guard's "significantly higher survivabilty" doesn't exist in AE content even when he's in defensive mode. That the guardian is already sacrifising survivabilty. Look lower in the post for the results in dps gear (dual weilding) and offencive stance. Much lower survivabilty than the SK. Put my guard in O stance and dual weilding he survives less than half the time the SK can.Had my test showed the guard stay alive as long or longer than the SK in the AE fight then I could agree with sacrising more defensive bonuses to gain some measure of control. But the SK already has the survibility, the dps, and the control. Why should we sacrifice even more when the SK already has the edge on AE in every category?And besides I"m not even talking AoE for the group moderate. Right now we can't hold aggro on anything unless we build the perfect group. That's the purpose of this post. This thread. All the AoE stuff is a side track. All the focus on SK vs Zerk vs Pally vs Us is derailing.I let myself be taken that way merely to try and debunk the idea that Guards are the best at survivabilty. In certain situations he can be. But in EVERY situation the guardian struggles to hold aggro against dps classes without the perfect group. We have no flexibility in heroic content and we get no advantage to compensate for it. This is my complaint.

RafaelSmith

12-03-2009, 04:24 PM

Back on topic........i hopeGiven my experience trying to effectively play a Guard for mostly Heroic content and low-mid tier raiding there are two things that I believe would turn what is now pure frustration into something still challenging yet fun.1) Group moderate...make it via AA for all I care. We have so many wasted AA points in the Guardian EOF tree and there is already and AA that boosts Moderate so that would be a good place. Guardian RP/Lorewise this actually makes sense.2) Hold The Line: make it proc PBAE, increase the threat amount 2-3x....then perhaps some AA ability that adds a additional threat DOT component to the proc.None of that would mean a [Removed for Content] thing at the upper end of raiding because things like Moderate and HTL don't even play a roll. MTs for top end raiding don't rely on those things to do their job.

Bruener

12-03-2009, 04:48 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Back on topic........i hopeGiven my experience trying to effectively play a Guard for mostly Heroic content and low-mid tier raiding there are two things that I believe would turn what is now pure frustration into something still challenging yet fun.1) Group moderate...make it via AA for all I care. We have so many wasted AA points in the Guardian EOF tree and there is already and AA that boosts Moderate so that would be a good place. Guardian RP/Lorewise this actually makes sense.2) Hold The Line: make it proc PBAE, increase the threat amount 2-3x....then perhaps some AA ability that adds a additional threat DOT component to the proc.None of that would mean a [Removed for Content] thing at the upper end of raiding because things like Moderate and HTL don't even play a roll. MTs for top end raiding don't rely on those things to do their job.</blockquote>The increase to Hold the Line would be vastly OP'd. It would basically become a HUGE Mutagenic Burst spell. To give you an idea on an AE fight Mutagenic Burst can do 1k+ DPS. So now you want to have basically a copy of that that is bigger and can be increased even more and procs even more often. Not to mention that with the Taunt Crit mechanic going in it would probably be even larger. Seems vastly OP'd to me.Instead yeah I agree that the threat amount could use an increase of 2-3x. Than possibly some type of additional hate increase thru AAs. But making it a PBAoE each time it procs is overboard.

RafaelSmith

12-03-2009, 05:18 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Back on topic........i hopeGiven my experience trying to effectively play a Guard for mostly Heroic content and low-mid tier raiding there are two things that I believe would turn what is now pure frustration into something still challenging yet fun.1) Group moderate...make it via AA for all I care. We have so many wasted AA points in the Guardian EOF tree and there is already and AA that boosts Moderate so that would be a good place. Guardian RP/Lorewise this actually makes sense.2) Hold The Line: make it proc PBAE, increase the threat amount 2-3x....then perhaps some AA ability that adds a additional threat DOT component to the proc.None of that would mean a [Removed for Content] thing at the upper end of raiding because things like Moderate and HTL don't even play a roll. MTs for top end raiding don't rely on those things to do their job.</blockquote>The increase to Hold the Line would be vastly OP'd. It would basically become a HUGE Mutagenic Burst spell. To give you an idea on an AE fight Mutagenic Burst can do 1k+ DPS. So now you want to have basically a copy of that that is bigger and can be increased even more and procs even more often. Not to mention that with the Taunt Crit mechanic going in it would probably be even larger. Seems vastly OP'd to me.Instead yeah I agree that the threat amount could use an increase of 2-3x. Than possibly some type of additional hate increase thru AAs. But making it a PBAoE each time it procs is overboard.</blockquote>HTL does not proc DMG.If HTL proced DMG I would agree but we are talking just +threat and its only a 50% chance to proc when hit. A full burn Warlock or SK or stupid Assassin not assisting would still rip aggro with ease from a Guard.

jadsded

12-03-2009, 09:14 PM

After listening to all of the arguments on the previous 11 pages, I think I fall into the group moderate and buffing up HTL camp.Group moderate - I have played my guard since just after launch and have only (few exceptions) done heroic content with him. I had a built in group consisting of my guard, a templar, a swashy, and a wizzie. With moderate on the wizzie and the Swashy transfer, aggro management was fine (never bucklered spec since I never had the best gear). I had rescue and reinforcement ready for those times when we picked up an add, I had to hunker down, or I saw the wizzie's fusion macro. Now I have 6/7 T3 pieces on him (thanks to my dirge) Mythed and Ekron's Blade for an offhand. Guess what, virtually anyone in my group that isn't moderated will pull agg off me and at times even the ones that do unless I have 2 out of 3 of the needed classes (even then i'm using my snaps way too often). Basically unless i'm rolling with dirge, coercer, and assassin/swashbuckler, I feel like a failure and I don't have the time to wait for that set up basically ever. Group Mod would be a great step in the right direction.Buffing HTL: Personally I'm for either making it a PBAoE and not change the values, or increasing the taunt amounts by 3-4x what they are now. I say no to sacrificing anything for this also. HTL has always been (or at least was) our equalizer when it came to AOE encounters. It gave guards that extra bit of hate needed to handle mutiple targets without boosting our dps, where the other plate tanks had more AOE DPS therefore more AOE hate. It used to be situational, now it is essential for single targets (which is less concerning now than it used to be since I have to bring a coercer anyhow.) Seriously, with survivorability being pretty much equal and dps being quite different, who really thinks that implimenting both of these are going to make guards crazily OPed??? Everyone now realizes that crusaders and zerkers are great options as tanks and to a lesser extent brawlers (sorry guys), who can say with a straight face that a group that is ready to roll and just needs a tank is going to hold out for a guard over any other plate class if these get implimented. I can tell you one thing, right now the opposite happens daily.

Bruener

12-03-2009, 09:31 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Back on topic........i hopeGiven my experience trying to effectively play a Guard for mostly Heroic content and low-mid tier raiding there are two things that I believe would turn what is now pure frustration into something still challenging yet fun.1) Group moderate...make it via AA for all I care. We have so many wasted AA points in the Guardian EOF tree and there is already and AA that boosts Moderate so that would be a good place. Guardian RP/Lorewise this actually makes sense.2) Hold The Line: make it proc PBAE, increase the threat amount 2-3x....then perhaps some AA ability that adds a additional threat DOT component to the proc.None of that would mean a [Removed for Content] thing at the upper end of raiding because things like Moderate and HTL don't even play a roll. MTs for top end raiding don't rely on those things to do their job.</blockquote>The increase to Hold the Line would be vastly OP'd. It would basically become a HUGE Mutagenic Burst spell. To give you an idea on an AE fight Mutagenic Burst can do 1k+ DPS. So now you want to have basically a copy of that that is bigger and can be increased even more and procs even more often. Not to mention that with the Taunt Crit mechanic going in it would probably be even larger. Seems vastly OP'd to me.Instead yeah I agree that the threat amount could use an increase of 2-3x. Than possibly some type of additional hate increase thru AAs. But making it a PBAoE each time it procs is overboard.</blockquote>HTL does not proc DMG.If HTL proced DMG I would agree but we are talking just +threat and its only a 50% chance to proc when hit. A full burn Warlock or SK or stupid Assassin not assisting would still rip aggro with ease from a Guard.</blockquote>Its amazing that you can't see how OP'd that would be. That single ability would put out more AE hate than any other plate tank. You take an encounter like FG and you are talking like 8 mobs each hitting you. Every other time they hit you you are talking about 8 targets for the hate from HTL. So, taking a look at the spell right now it has a 50% chance to proc like 600 hate when any opponent damages the Guard.Now you want this to be like 3x as much hate....that makes it 1800 hate every other time a mob damages you.You also want this to be a PBAoE.8 mobs on you......you are going to proc that thing like 4x a second. 4 times 1800 equals 7200 hate per mob per second. 8 mobs and you are talking about 57600 hate per second.Oh now lets do a room pull and see what happens. So we get 16 mobs. That thing is going to proc like 8x a second. 8 times 1800 equals 14400 hate for each mob around you in a PBAoE. 16 mobs and you are talking about 230400 hate per second.Yeah, lets just make Guards the de facto tank for everything.....go to a zone like EH and pull the whole floor, afk for 10 minutes and come back when raid is finished killing the mobs.This idea is extremely over-powered and that is before even introducing the taunt crit mechanic.

Davngr1

12-04-2009, 03:23 AM

yea well.. nerfing crusaders isin't going to fix guard issues.so jump off that band wagon please. i have been playing a guard since dof and an sk since eof and i can assure you SK is about where it should be as a class. the proc nerf all ready have brougth crusaders down near where they should be. what needs to happen now, is guard should get the clear upper hand in survivability or recive the same amount of dps tank abitlitys that dps tanks recived from defensive tanks. brawlers are being reworked completely it seems so ill wait and see then comment on that but it better involve "true" aoe attack AA or ability so some sort for at least one brawler.

EverRude

12-04-2009, 06:20 AM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its amazing that you can't see how OP'd that would be. That single ability would put out more AE hate than any other plate tank. You take an encounter like FG and you are talking like 8 mobs each hitting you. Every other time they hit you you are talking about 8 targets for the hate from HTL. So, taking a look at the spell right now it has a 50% chance to proc like 600 hate when any opponent damages the Guard.Now you want this to be like 3x as much hate....that makes it 1800 hate every other time a mob damages you.You also want this to be a PBAoE.8 mobs on you......you are going to proc that thing like 4x a second. 4 times 1800 equals 7200 hate per mob per second. 8 mobs and you are talking about 57600 hate per second.Oh now lets do a room pull and see what happens. So we get 16 mobs. That thing is going to proc like 8x a second. 8 times 1800 equals 14400 hate for each mob around you in a PBAoE. 16 mobs and you are talking about 230400 hate per second.Yeah, lets just make Guards the de facto tank for everything.....go to a zone like EH and pull the whole floor, afk for 10 minutes and come back when raid is finished killing the mobs.This idea is extremely over-powered and that is before even introducing the taunt crit mechanic.</blockquote>I have to agree with Bruener that it seems it would be OP'd if it proc'd AE everytime it proc'd. But I'm against it for another reason. I would be forced to turn off that spell when fighting, or fighting in proximity to, non-aggro mobs. Assuming it would proc out of encounter. And it needs to to do any good as a true AoE ability. We don't know how to content will be laid out in the upcoming expac. But I would not be surprised if there are dungeons that have a mix of aggro/non-aggro mobs.I be more in favor of Battle Cry having that awesome hate component on it like Death March has. Make the recast, cast speed and duration match Death March and Battle Cry becomes a nice AoE snap and threat. Being the only real AoE threat would not allow the guard to tank OT however. The adjusted Battle Cry would make a good snap and would be some threat it would not OP the guard, because it only affect's the guard's group and the guard has no other AoE threat skills to hold the AE mobs.Group Moderate could aid in addressing the gap between taunt (which guards are designed to rely on) and dps. Giving guards flexibility in group makeup, while the adjusted Battle Cry could just be the one decent AoE threat/snap we need to grab each mobs attention without increasing our DPS.

RafaelSmith

12-04-2009, 10:53 AM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its amazing that you can't see how OP'd that would be. That single ability would put out more AE hate than any other plate tank. You take an encounter like FG and you are talking like 8 mobs each hitting you. Every other time they hit you you are talking about 8 targets for the hate from HTL. So, taking a look at the spell right now it has a 50% chance to proc like 600 hate when any opponent damages the Guard.Now you want this to be like 3x as much hate....that makes it 1800 hate every other time a mob damages you.You also want this to be a PBAoE.8 mobs on you......you are going to proc that thing like 4x a second. 4 times 1800 equals 7200 hate per mob per second. 8 mobs and you are talking about 57600 hate per second.Oh now lets do a room pull and see what happens. So we get 16 mobs. That thing is going to proc like 8x a second. 8 times 1800 equals 14400 hate for each mob around you in a PBAoE. 16 mobs and you are talking about 230400 hate per second.Yeah, lets just make Guards the de facto tank for everything.....go to a zone like EH and pull the whole floor, afk for 10 minutes and come back when raid is finished killing the mobs.This idea is extremely over-powered and that is before even introducing the taunt crit mechanic.</blockquote>I have to agree with Bruener that it seems it would be OP'd if it proc'd AE everytime it proc'd. But I'm against it for another reason. I would be forced to turn off that spell when fighting, or fighting in proximity to, non-aggro mobs. Assuming it would proc out of encounter. And it needs to to do any good as a true AoE ability. We don't know how to content will be laid out in the upcoming expac. But I would not be surprised if there are dungeons that have a mix of aggro/non-aggro mobs.I be more in favor of Battle Cry having that awesome hate component on it like Death March has. Make the recast, cast speed and duration match Death March and Battle Cry becomes a nice AoE snap and threat. Being the only real AoE threat would not allow the guard to tank OT however. The adjusted Battle Cry would make a good snap and would be some threat it would not OP the guard, because it only affect's the guard's group and the guard has no other AoE threat skills to hold the AE mobs.Group Moderate could aid in addressing the gap between taunt (which guards are designed to rely on) and dps. Giving guards flexibility in group makeup, while the adjusted Battle Cry could just be the one decent AoE threat/snap we need to grab each mobs attention without increasing our DPS.</blockquote>Yeah I can see now that making it AE and upping its values would be too much. HTL is one of those bufffs/abilities that has become rather useless as the game has evolved away from small amounts of +threat meaning anything. Seems like a good place to give us some sorta boost since it pretty worthless as it stands today.Maybe make it AE but not increase the threat amount. I am fine with having to be careful in areas where there is danger of aggroing things you dont want. That to me would just be another factor of being a good tank or being lazy.

Bruener

12-04-2009, 12:04 PM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its amazing that you can't see how OP'd that would be. That single ability would put out more AE hate than any other plate tank. You take an encounter like FG and you are talking like 8 mobs each hitting you. Every other time they hit you you are talking about 8 targets for the hate from HTL. So, taking a look at the spell right now it has a 50% chance to proc like 600 hate when any opponent damages the Guard.Now you want this to be like 3x as much hate....that makes it 1800 hate every other time a mob damages you.You also want this to be a PBAoE.8 mobs on you......you are going to proc that thing like 4x a second. 4 times 1800 equals 7200 hate per mob per second. 8 mobs and you are talking about 57600 hate per second.Oh now lets do a room pull and see what happens. So we get 16 mobs. That thing is going to proc like 8x a second. 8 times 1800 equals 14400 hate for each mob around you in a PBAoE. 16 mobs and you are talking about 230400 hate per second.Yeah, lets just make Guards the de facto tank for everything.....go to a zone like EH and pull the whole floor, afk for 10 minutes and come back when raid is finished killing the mobs.This idea is extremely over-powered and that is before even introducing the taunt crit mechanic.</blockquote>I have to agree with Bruener that it seems it would be OP'd if it proc'd AE everytime it proc'd. But I'm against it for another reason. I would be forced to turn off that spell when fighting, or fighting in proximity to, non-aggro mobs. Assuming it would proc out of encounter. And it needs to to do any good as a true AoE ability. We don't know how to content will be laid out in the upcoming expac. But I would not be surprised if there are dungeons that have a mix of aggro/non-aggro mobs.I be more in favor of Battle Cry having that awesome hate component on it like Death March has. Make the recast, cast speed and duration match Death March and Battle Cry becomes a nice AoE snap and threat. Being the only real AoE threat would not allow the guard to tank OT however. The adjusted Battle Cry would make a good snap and would be some threat it would not OP the guard, because it only affect's the guard's group and the guard has no other AoE threat skills to hold the AE mobs.Group Moderate could aid in addressing the gap between taunt (which guards are designed to rely on) and dps. Giving guards flexibility in group makeup, while the adjusted Battle Cry could just be the one decent AoE threat/snap we need to grab each mobs attention without increasing our DPS.</blockquote>Yeah I can see now that making it AE and upping its values would be too much. HTL is one of those bufffs/abilities that has become rather useless as the game has evolved away from small amounts of +threat meaning anything. Seems like a good place to give us some sorta boost since it pretty worthless as it stands today.Maybe make it AE but not increase the threat amount. I am fine with having to be careful in areas where there is danger of aggroing things you dont want. That to me would just be another factor of being a good tank or being lazy.</blockquote>Honestly the addition of the new taunt mechanics is going to change a lot of these abilities. Assuming that they will allow the taunt proc to be affected by the mechanics the numbers are going to jump a huge amount. I mean +base taunt and +taunt crit is going to double to triple all those abilities.50% of everytime a mob hitting you having it do 1800 hate to the mob will go a long ways to hold hate in AE situations. There would still be the issue of being with a Warlock probably but with any other DPS class it would be enough to hold hate. Throw in the idea of a Group Moderate to take care of those pesky AE'ers and at the heroic level I really don't see Guards having AE issues than.I guess my biggest concern is that people are making pretty crazy suggestions without remembering that SOE is adding some mechanics for taunts anyway. Taunt crit and +base taunt are going to be huge and will mean taunts increase the same as DPS.As an example think about what Guards are doing right now...DPS and their taunts. Now triple all those taunt values and think about how much easier it is going to be to hold hate. That is what the mechanic changes are going to do.

RafaelSmith

12-04-2009, 12:14 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its amazing that you can't see how OP'd that would be. That single ability would put out more AE hate than any other plate tank. You take an encounter like FG and you are talking like 8 mobs each hitting you. Every other time they hit you you are talking about 8 targets for the hate from HTL. So, taking a look at the spell right now it has a 50% chance to proc like 600 hate when any opponent damages the Guard.Now you want this to be like 3x as much hate....that makes it 1800 hate every other time a mob damages you.You also want this to be a PBAoE.8 mobs on you......you are going to proc that thing like 4x a second. 4 times 1800 equals 7200 hate per mob per second. 8 mobs and you are talking about 57600 hate per second.Oh now lets do a room pull and see what happens. So we get 16 mobs. That thing is going to proc like 8x a second. 8 times 1800 equals 14400 hate for each mob around you in a PBAoE. 16 mobs and you are talking about 230400 hate per second.Yeah, lets just make Guards the de facto tank for everything.....go to a zone like EH and pull the whole floor, afk for 10 minutes and come back when raid is finished killing the mobs.This idea is extremely over-powered and that is before even introducing the taunt crit mechanic.</blockquote>I have to agree with Bruener that it seems it would be OP'd if it proc'd AE everytime it proc'd. But I'm against it for another reason. I would be forced to turn off that spell when fighting, or fighting in proximity to, non-aggro mobs. Assuming it would proc out of encounter. And it needs to to do any good as a true AoE ability. We don't know how to content will be laid out in the upcoming expac. But I would not be surprised if there are dungeons that have a mix of aggro/non-aggro mobs.I be more in favor of Battle Cry having that awesome hate component on it like Death March has. Make the recast, cast speed and duration match Death March and Battle Cry becomes a nice AoE snap and threat. Being the only real AoE threat would not allow the guard to tank OT however. The adjusted Battle Cry would make a good snap and would be some threat it would not OP the guard, because it only affect's the guard's group and the guard has no other AoE threat skills to hold the AE mobs.Group Moderate could aid in addressing the gap between taunt (which guards are designed to rely on) and dps. Giving guards flexibility in group makeup, while the adjusted Battle Cry could just be the one decent AoE threat/snap we need to grab each mobs attention without increasing our DPS.</blockquote>Yeah I can see now that making it AE and upping its values would be too much.HTL is one of those bufffs/abilities that has become rather useless as the game has evolved away from small amounts of +threat meaning anything. Seems like a good place to give us some sorta boost since it pretty worthless as it stands today.Maybe make it AE but not increase the threat amount. I am fine with having to be careful in areas where there is danger of aggroing things you dont want. That to me would just be another factor of being a good tank or being lazy.</blockquote>Honestly the addition of the new taunt mechanics is going to change a lot of these abilities. Assuming that they will allow the taunt proc to be affected by the mechanics the numbers are going to jump a huge amount. I mean +base taunt and +taunt crit is going to double to triple all those abilities.50% of everytime a mob hitting you having it do 1800 hate to the mob will go a long ways to hold hate in AE situations. There would still be the issue of being with a Warlock probably but with any other DPS class it would be enough to hold hate. Throw in the idea of a Group Moderate to take care of those pesky AE'ers and at the heroic level I really don't see Guards having AE issues than.I guess my biggest concern is that people are making pretty crazy suggestions without remembering that SOE is adding some mechanics for taunts anyway. Taunt crit and +base taunt are going to be huge and will mean taunts increase the same as DPS.As an example think about what Guards are doing right now...DPS and their taunts. Now triple all those taunt values and think about how much easier it is going to be to hold hate. That is what the mechanic changes are going to do.</blockquote>Well we can only talk about facts we know. I have not seen anything about what is comming with the expansion. The assumption is that it will be something similar to what was in that revamp. WIth any luck it will just be the new taunt mechanics and not any of that other crap associated with buffs and stances they tried to pull.

Yimway

12-04-2009, 01:04 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Had my test showed the guard stay alive as long or longer than the SK in the AE fight then I could agree with sacrising more defensive bonuses to gain some measure of control. But the SK already has the survibility, the dps, and the control. Why should we sacrifice even more when the SK already has the edge on AE in every category?And besides I"m not even talking AoE for the group moderate. Right now we can't hold aggro on anything unless we build the perfect group. That's the purpose of this post. This thread. All the AoE stuff is a side track. All the focus on SK vs Zerk vs Pally vs Us is derailing.</blockquote>If you had a healer, and could sustain that fight for say a 3 min durration, you would find the benefit of the aoe lifetap would be deminished. Or as I mean to say, the solo testing you did cause of the low durration for both tanks causes the lifetap to be over estimated in your numbers.Your examples are still helpful, they just aren't inclusive enough to represent practical application.I almost have a full set of t3 on my sk, and I have a full set banked on my guard. As soon as I can put them both in similar gear, I'll group them with my warden and dirge and pull the first floor of B:COA and do some survivability parsing. I can just spam heal with warden and auto follow for dirge buffs and provide a more accurate over time comparison with conditions that are more practicle in application.

Landiin

12-04-2009, 01:11 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Had my test showed the guard stay alive as long or longer than the SK in the AE fight then I could agree with sacrising more defensive bonuses to gain some measure of control. But the SK already has the survibility, the dps, and the control. Why should we sacrifice even more when the SK already has the edge on AE in every category?And besides I"m not even talking AoE for the group moderate. Right now we can't hold aggro on anything unless we build the perfect group. That's the purpose of this post. This thread. All the AoE stuff is a side track. All the focus on SK vs Zerk vs Pally vs Us is derailing.</blockquote>If you had a healer, and could sustain that fight for say a 3 min durration, you would find the benefit of the aoe lifetap would be deminished. Or as I mean to say, the solo testing you did cause of the low durration for both tanks causes the lifetap to be over estimated in your numbers.</blockquote>What AOE fight last over 3 min or even 1 min for that matter(none raid)? I see your point but it dosn't matter because of how fast fights last. If normal fights lasted over half a min I could sort of agree with you on losing some def but as it is now I can't and think it would [Removed for Content] us even more.

EverRude

12-04-2009, 01:14 PM

Yeah I wish SOE would just come right out and say what changes they have in mind. Changing taunt values and adding crit alone would help guardians a lot. But will the proc from HTL crit? Or Dark Caress for SK for that matter? If not that skill will remain subpar. Provided they don't go overboard with taunt values and crit, the group moderate should be needed. Especially if they remove hate mod/transfers from the game as they planned before. If they go overboard we will all be easy mode taunt bots anyways. I don't want them going too far though. I'll take taunt bot over not playing at all, but would rather need some thought and strategy to tank.

Yimway

12-04-2009, 01:23 PM

<cite>Toran@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote>What AOE fight last over 3 min or even 1 min for that matter(none raid)? I see your point but it dosn't matter because of how fast fights last. If normal fights lasted over half a min I could sort of agree with you on losing some def but as it is now I can't and think it would [Removed for Content] us even more.</blockquote>Do you wait more than 4 seconds between pulls?The reason this provides better data is it accomidates for the full reuse timers of all abilities to show a more pratical comparison between the two.

Yimway

12-04-2009, 01:25 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yeah I wish SOE would just come right out and say what changes they have in mind. Changing taunt values and adding crit alone would help guardians a lot. But will the proc from HTL crit? Or Dark Caress for SK for that matter? If not that skill will remain subpar. </blockquote>Given the person in charge of this is no longer at SoE, and they haven't publicly announced who the replacement is, and the time it might take for them to come up to speed...I'm not sure they know what they want to do yet.

EverRude

12-04-2009, 01:30 PM

Actually that would be at a minimum 3 min fight, even with the SK. Pulling the whole top floor? I think you'll loose your healer before the tank drops as I am sure you suspect. But it is also true that in reality few fights last that long with a full group 2 min maybe with a reasonable pace though CoA. But more like 20 seconds for you average fight through most other lower tier shard zones. CoA is a special zone that requires some specifc tactics. Unless your loaded with AE tank and DPS then it's the funniest zone to play IMO. I disagree with your premise that most fights are much longer than my test was but I certainly would love to see the results.

EverRude

12-04-2009, 01:38 PM

Atan, I would like to recommend you test in NA. The first 3 groups of mobs are pretty much consistently 4 level 83's. If you grab all 3 groups even with your T3 and Myths you should manage a 3 min fight.I say this because CoA mobs vary in level and quantity a lot more which introduces more veriance to you test.

Yimway

12-04-2009, 01:44 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Atan, I would like to recommend you test in NA. The first 3 groups of mobs are pretty much consistently 4 level 83's. If you grab all 3 groups even with your T3 and Myths you should manage a 3 min fight.I say this because CoA mobs vary in level and quantity a lot more which introduces more veriance to you test.</blockquote>I can test both, I was looking for longer durrations to represent normal gameplay more accurately, that being nearly constant pulling/fighting with little to no downtime.It may take me 2-3 more woe runs to get the SK enough gear to get them on the same relative gear point. So might take a week.

EverRude

12-04-2009, 01:57 PM

Atan@Unrest wrote: EverRude wrote: Atan, I would like to recommend you test in NA. The first 3 groups of mobs are pretty much consistently 4 level 83's. If you grab all 3 groups even with your T3 and Myths you should manage a 3 min fight. I say this because CoA mobs vary in level and quantity a lot more which introduces more veriance to you test. I can test both, I was looking for longer durrations to represent normal gameplay more accurately, that being nearly constant pulling/fighting with little to no downtime. It may take me 2-3 more woe runs to get the SK enough gear to get them on the same relative gear point. So might take a week.I know what you're saying. I agree it's a fair test. I doubt it'll reveal a lot different than mine did. However I just think that CoA is a bad spot due to the level problem. Sometimes those mobs are nearly all level 80 sometimes level 81 and sometimes a 50/50 mix. Either tank fighting more yellows than whites will be damaged more than one fighting more whites than yellows. Also you would seriously impress me if your group of 3 can take down the first 3 groups in NA in less than 3 min.

Yimway

12-04-2009, 02:11 PM

<cite>EverRude wrote:</cite><blockquote>Also you would seriously impress me if your group of 3 can take down the first 3 groups in NA in less than 3 min.</blockquote>Heh, I know they can take em down, but yeah, I dunno about 3 mins. I'm just looking for 3 mins worth of data really if I can get it.

EverRude

12-04-2009, 02:52 PM

Atan@Unrest wrote: EverRude wrote: Also you would seriously impress me if your group of 3 can take down the first 3 groups in NA in less than 3 min. Heh, I know they can take em down, but yeah, I dunno about 3 mins. I'm just looking for 3 mins worth of data really if I can get it.Do you have concern that perhaps the dirge buffs may affect one tank more than the other. Like the parry buffs adding more to SK than Guard if the guard is closer to cap? Or do you plan to turn the defensive buffs off from your group members.Also I'm sure you are far more skilled than I at using act but can you accurately separate the healing from healer and SK? I assume there is some way to figure out how much of the SK's healing had an impact? Afterall part of the issue was to show whether the SKks life tap compensated fully for his lack of defence compared to thr Guard. I ask this stuff now to avoid as much of the "but you test isn't accurate because..." crap will most likely come up for you as it did myself. By introducing more variables you add to the difficutly of getting consistent results. I am certain that if I ran my tests again I could get more consistent results at the high end for both classes because I needed to "practice" a bit. I appreciate that you willing to attempt it. Good luck on yer WoE drops. That place gets frtustrating after a while.

thial

12-06-2009, 08:28 AM

Group moderate would help, a boost to htl would help(but not pbaoe that is a little overboard a better proc rate and a reasonable amount of hate) and some sort of open aoe hate(no dps) would help. My Biggest beef with the guard is this..I raid the guard I clear totmc, clear PoA kill zarakon get to yke all tanking on the guard(with help of the ot on respected ifghts) after raid i wana do some heroic instances well unless I have a dirge + hate xfer or a group with out a illy,warlock, conjy the guard is [Removed for Content], and that my friends is complete BS there is no balance in the game to make that fair or FUN. Keyword there is FUN its a game its meant to be fun if its not fun and its meant to be fun than something is wrong. There is no reason why i should have to take my lesser geared pally over my guard for anything, especially to do heroic junk. My guard should be able to take any group thrown at him just as my pally can and do the dam zone, while having fun. Sure the guard can do it but was it fun, no. I dont play the pally because I want two tanks I play two tanks because 1 is fun for heroic content and the other is not. The guard is fun for raids but thats cause hes got all the buffs and the RESPECT for being the tank. The bs that dps needs to relies what tank there with is and adjust accordingly is just that BS, the dps should have to adjust he what buffs the tank has Ie dirge coe and transfer but that adjustment should account for EVERY tank...The balance of tanks should be measured by DPS and Defense not hate. All tanks regardless of class should be able to hold = hate. But the more dps the fighter can do the less defense and less taunt value the fighter has and the more defense the less dps and more taunt. so for example the offensive tank would get an attack that does 5k damage where the defensive tanks gets an attack thats 5k taunt thuse in the end the hate is equal, granted taunts get crit and + taunt amounts at the same rate you can get crit and +ca amounts. That would still leave people with a decision when they make a tank of what they want to do. Do I wanna be a DPS tank or a defensive tank than you ask your self am I a warrior crusader or a brawler. That would still leave people with the choice of having a slower moving group vrs a faster moving group this would still let the Offensive tanks tank the end game stuff once they get the gear that the defensive tanks where needed for in progression. This is hard to do though because than you need to Define defensive tanks and offensive tanks and than balance there dps vrs defense than = that to each others hate. Actually its not hard.also its 6 am I just got back from the bars Im tired so proofreading and correting mistakes is beyond me atm. But anyone that disagrees with the basics of waht I say just either A. wants to remian the supreme tanks or B. wants the supreme tank tittle back, I'm not looking to be the supreme tank I'm looking for tanks to actually be balanced and regardles of what some may think tanks right now are far from balanced even further than they have been before.